1920-06-21

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. J. J. DENIS (Joliette):: We are informed through the press of this country that the labours of the Canada-West Indian Conference have come to a close but that the text of the agreement will not be .made public until August 4. Is it not the intention of thfe Government to make a statement to the House before the end of the present session regarding the work of this conference and the decisions that have been arrived at?


Bt. Hon. Sir GEOBGE FOSTEE (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I may inform my hon. friend that ft is not the intention of the Government to make public before the date set, the details of the arrangements that have been made. The date which was set will enable the delegates from the West Indian colonies to arrive at their homes and present their reports to their respective governments. August 4 has been agreed upon as providing ample time for that purpose, and this is the practice that has always obtained iin sudhl cases. An official statement was made to the press, and before the House rises I shall be able to make a statement as full as that, if not more complete, to the House itself.



GBAND TETJNK ABBITBATION.


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (leader of the Opposition):: May I ask the Prime Minister when we may expect an announcement regarding the arbitrators to he appointed in connection with the acquisition of the Grand Trunk Kailway? There are two arbitrators still to be appointed.
Kt .Hon. Sir BOBEET BOKDEN (Prime Minister):	So far as the Grand Trunk is
concerned I am not in a position to ,.ake a statement. So far as the Government, is concerned, no appointment has been made and, of course, no announcement can be made until the matter has been considered and determined.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I irav point out that last sesion we were told

the reason the Government was anxious to get the Bill through was that the arbitrators might be appointed at once, and that if the appointments wre not then made there might be delay.


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: I do not think that any delay is likely to occur as my hon. friend suggests. Both the Grand Trunk Railway and the Government are making preparations to submit evidence to the arbitrators when they are appointed, and arrangements are not yet completed on either side to present the evidence. Consequently no delay is attributable to either of the parties concerned.



THE NORTHWEST ROUTE, LIMITED.


[Stage Direction]
The House proceeded to the consideration of amendments made by the Senate to Bill No. 72 to incorporate the Northwest Route, Limited.
Mr. W. A. BOYS (South Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, I have just seen for the first time the amendments made by the Senate to this Bill. Section 5 is amended by providing that the head office of the company shall be at the city of Winnipeg instead of London, with a branch ofiice in the latter place; and section 6 is amended to read:
The annual meeting of the shareholders shall be held on the second Tuesday of September and may be held at the head office, or if so Piovided by by-law of the Company, at the branch office in London, England.
I see no objection to these amendments, which I think will meet with the approval of the company.
Amendments concurred in.
,	PRIVATE BILLS.
first reading:
Bill No. 193 (from the Senate), for the relief of Nora Dowle.-Mr. Douglas (Strath-cona.)	.



SECOND READINGS.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 185 (from the Senate), for the relief of Graziano Bertini.-Mr. Pedlow.
Bill No. 186 (from the Senate), for the relief of William Henry Caswell.-Mr. Duff.
Bill No. 187 (from the Senate), for the relief of John Covert.-Mr. Porter.
Bill No. 188 (from the Senate), for the relief of Mary Ireland-Mr. Nesbitt.
Bill No. 189 (from the Senate), for the relief of John Daniel Mills.-Mr. Ross.
Bill No. 190 (from the Senate), for the relief of Joseph Aimee Wilfrid David.- Mr. MacNutt.
Bill No. 191 (from the Senate), for the relief of Richard Simpson.-Mr. Mowat.
Bill No. 192 to incorporate the Reliance Insurance Company of Canada.-Mr. Cas-grain.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).

*Mr. LEMIEUX:: 1.	Why have Griffenhagen and Associates been appointed to investigate the Post Office Department?
2.	Is it true that the Government have agreed to pay that firm $10,000 a month for said investigation?
3.	How many German Americans are members of the above firm?
4.	Could not a British or a Canadian firm have been employed for such an investigation?


Rt. Hon. Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: 1.	This firm has been retained by the Government to assist in reorganization work because of its wide experience in the investigation and reorganization of governmental departments, public bodies and industrial establishments in the United States and Canada. It has a trained staff composed in part of Canadians which specializes in efficiency and reorganization work, including the study and survey of departmental organization, accounting and offi.ce procedure, methods of work, and the installation of organization, records, and procedure that a long experience in this work has shown to be best adapted to economical and efficient administration of Government departments as required in the public interest.
2.	The firm is to be paid at the rate of $10,.000 per month for a stated number of experts, working in conjunction with the Deputy Head and other selected officials of the department concerned. The investigation, however, includes other depatments than the Post Office.
3.	None.
4.	There is no firm in Canada with wide experience in this kind of work. This firm is familiar with conditions in the 'Canadian Service because of its work during a year or more under the Civil Service Commission, and has thus acquired a knowledge of the problems arising in the administration of various departments. The work of reclassification has brought it into more or less close contact with the departments, and disclosed many of the weaknesses that it is

proposed to remedy. No other concern, known to the Government, is so well fitted by its long experience in the investigation and reorganization of industrial and public bodies, as well as its immediate contact with problems encountered in the administration of the Government of Canada. Any other firm would be under the disadvantage of having to spend a long period of nonproductive time to become familiar with the conditions throughout the service. The reorganization of the Department of Public Printing and Stationery has shown the possibilities of improvement in the service that may be expected through them.


IMMIGRATION IN 1919 AND 1920.
Mr. JOHNSTON:: 1.	How many immigrants entered Canada during March and April, 1919, from the British Empire, from the United States and from other countries?
2.	How many immigrants entered Canada during March and April, 1920, from the British Empire, from the United States and from other countries?


Hon. Mr. CALDER:: 1.
United Other
British.	States.	countries.March, 19.19. .	. 3,442	6,468	753April, 1919. . .	. 3,244	7,524	5002.	6,686	13,992	1,253March, 1920. .	. 4,677	5,170	952April, 1920. . .	. 6,229	6,324	73410,906	11,494	1,686


SYRIANS IN CANADA.
Mr. EINFRET:: 1.	What is the Syrian population in Canada?
2.	How many Syrians immigrated in 1919 and 1920?
3.	Are there any entry fees on all Syrian immigrants?
4.	Does the Government intend to cancel said entry fees?
Mr. 'CALDER:
1.	The census of 1911 gives the number of Syrians in Canada as 3,867; since then 765 'Syrians have legally entered Canada.
2.	1919, nil; 1920, 18.
3.	No.
4.	See answer to No. 3.


DOMINION ARSENAL. QUEBEC.
Mr. DESAULNIERS:: 1.	Has 'Count Bury been appointed superintendent of the Quebec Armoury?
2.	Who 'is he?
3.	Where does he come from?
4.	By whom was he recommended?
5.	What is the nature of his services?


Hon. Mr. GUTHRIE:: 1.	Yes. Lieut.-Colonel H. R. V. Count de Bury and de Boearme was appointed Acting Superintendent of the Dominion Arsenal, Quebec, on the 1st day of May, 1920.
2.	He is an officer of the permanent force, being Major and Brevet Lieut.-Colonel in the Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps.
3.	See No. 2.
4.	By the Quartermaster-General.
5.	He is in complete charge of the Dominion Arsenal at Quebec, and is responsible for the efficient output of all ammunition and other articles manufactured therein for the Militia Department.


DOMINION GOVERNMENT ELEVATORS,
Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	How many grain elevators are operated or oonltrolled toy the Dominion Board of Grain Commissioners?
2.	What is the capacity of each and where located?
3.	What have 'been the receipts and shipment of grain into and' from each of these elevators during each of the last five years?
4.	What has been the cost *of operation of each for the years mentioned?
5.	To whom is charged or credited the losses or profits in connection with the operation of these elevators?
6.	What are the total losses or profits in connection with the operation of these elevators for the years mentioned?
7.	Has an annual audit, or any audit been made during the years mentioned? If so, where can the report toe obtained?


Rt. Hon. Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: 1.	Five.
2.
Located at.	Bushels Capacity.
Port Arthur, Ont	 3,250,000
Moosejaw, Sask	 3,500,000
Saskatoon, Sask	 3,500,000
Calgary, Alta	 2,500,000
Vancouver, B.C	 1,500,000
14,250,000
3. Receipts of grain:


NET BUSHELS.
[Stage Direction]
Crop year.	Port Arthur.	Moosejaw.	Saskatoon.	Calgary.	Vancouver.1914-15. .	
9,662,224	2,902,406	2,459,130	1915-16..	
34,517,472	5,493,157	8,446,143	1,924,603	1916-17..	
21,201.553	5,292,201	7,234,057	3,633,960	233,5201917-18. .	
11,139,869	4,330,356	8,356,238	3,350,268	736,0691918-19..	
5,341,811	3,056,151	2,924,575	3,552,520	881,720
[Stage Direction]
Shipments of grain:						
Crop year.	Port Arthur.	Moosejaw.	Saskatoon.	Calgary.	Vancouver.1914-15.. ..	9,736,821	2,803,566	2,477,037	1915-16.. ..	33,629,149	5^2.60^573	8^324^084	1,893,123	1916-17.. ..	21,503,139	5,323,606	7,328,350	3,652,390	229,9281917-18.. ..	11,850,918	4,446,213	8,359,096	3,304,830	623,6721918-19.. ..	5,469,250	3,082,455	3,006,313	3,656,422	916,2.624. Cost of operation	elevator fiscal	years ending 31st July:	1915.	1916.	1917.	1918.	1919.Port Arthur. . .	. . .$ 64,656 36	$104,056 29	$131,587 11	$110,041 53	$99,208 50Moosejaw. . . .	. . 38,558 72	52,157'70	84,980 13	73,726 88	83,237 61Saskatoon.. . .	. . 30,447 26	54,695 18	71,531 24	77,935 07	53,490 10Calgary	. . Nil	22,679 91	34,832 39	43,269 49	43,914 49Vancouver.. . .	.. Nil	Nil	16,260 20	14,590 18	17,819 89$133,662 34	$233,589 08	$339,191 07	$319,563 15	$297,670 595. All revenues and	moneys received are provided by parliamentary vote for the Can-	d enosited to ths	credit	of the Receiver	Gen- ada	Grain Act.	eral. Moneys	for operating expenses are	6. Net profits	after	deducting cost of operation, years ending 31st July:	1915.	1916.	1917.	1918.	1919.Port Arthur. . .	. . ,$125,5S2 03	$324,62.5 57	$416,922 92	$221,052 27	$524,037 29Moosejaw.. ..	. . 49,697 15	38,519 74	78,535 06	45,757 00	33,645 25Saskatoon. . . .	. . 46,782 25	80,166 68	108,714 65	60,675 79	35,503 47Calgary	*1,211 52	34,436 30	22,361 02	62,845 19Vancouver.. . .	[DOT]11,506 98	*4,641 59	13,514 54$222,061 43	$442,100 47	$627,101 95	$345,204 49	$669,545 74
Loss.
7. The annual audit has been made by Messrs. Marwick, Mitchell, Peat & Co., but has not been published.
CONTRACT WITH GRIFFINHAGEN AND ASSOCIATES.	[DOT]
Mr. PAPINEAU (for Mr. Lemieux) moved:: For a copy of Order in Council No. 123S, passed on the 31st day of May, 1920, concerning a contract entered into with Griffinhagen and associates at a rate of $10,000 per month.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Thomas Hay: I beg to lay the papers on the table oif the House.


BOARD OF COMMERCE-RESIGNATION OF CHAIRMAN.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. PAPINEAU (for Mr. Lemieux) mowed:
For a copy of all correspondence and documents sent to the Right Hon. Sir George Foster, under date of March 3, 1920, dealing with the resignation of the chairman of the Board of Commerce.
Rt. Hon. Sir GEORGE FOSTER (Minister of Trade iamd Commerce):: A motion quite similar to this, if not entirely so, was made by the horn, member for Provencher (Mr. Mcdloy) 'and the order was allowed 245
to pass with the remark that such papers as were in the public interest should be brought down. This may pass with the same remark applied to it.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. MICHAUD:: For a copy of all correspondence, documents, letters and reports relating to the Fisheries on the Restigouche river from Dalhousie, N.B., to Kedgwick, for the year 1919.


CANADA WHEAT BOARD.
[Stage Direction]
On the motion of right horn. Sir George Foster (Minister of Trade and Commerce), who said that the 'assent of His Excellency had been obtained, it was Tesolved that the House go into committee to-morrow on a resolution respecting the Canada Wheat Board.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of right hon. Sir Robert Borden, who said that the assent of His Excellency had been obtained, it was resolved that the House go into committee to-morrow cm a resolution standing in the name of the Minister of Finance auithoriz-
[Stage Direction]


inig the minister, on behalf of His Majesty, to endorse certain promissory notes to be given in part payment for ships built in Canadian yards.	\

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Sir Henry Drayton (Minister of Finance), who stated thait the assent of His Excellency the Governor General had been obtained, it was resolved that the House go into committee to-morrow on a resolution providing for insurance of a returned soldier or soldier's widow.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. N. W. Rowell (President of the Privy Council) who stated that the assent of His Excellency the Governor General had been obtained, it was resolved that the House do consider to-morrow a resolution with respect to the pension, gratuity or allowance payable to any member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Hon. Hugh Guthrie (Minister of Militia), who stated that the assent of His Excellency the Governor General had been obtained, it was resolved that the House do consider to-morrow a resolution with respect to the pension, gratuity or allowance payable, under the Militia Pension Act, to a widow or child.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion-of Right Hen. Sir Robert Borden, who stated that the assent of His Excellency the Governor General had been obtained, it was resolved that the House do to-morrow consider a resolution providing for amendments t* the Pension Act, chapter 43 of the statutes of 1919.

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from May 17, consideration in committee of Bill No. 12 (Hon. Mr. Guthrie) respecting the election of members of the House of Commons and the electoral franchise.-Mr. Boivin in the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN:: When progress was reported upon this Bill on Monday, May 17, paragraph (k) of clause 2, clauses 32, 63 and 101 with the amendment proposed by the Acting Solicitor General (Mr. Guthrie) had been allowed to stand. All of the other

clauses had been agreed to with the exception of clauses 19 and 76 which cannot be considered until the House has concurred in the required money resolution. Clause 32 had been discussed at length and was still before the committee. Shall clause 32 carry?


Mr. GUTHRIE:: I think we might first make an amendment which has been agreed upon to clause 100 in regard to advance polls.


Georges Henri Boivin: Mr. Guthrie moves by unanimous consent that clause 100 be now reconsidered. Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?
Mofion .agreed to.


Hugh Guthrie: The amendment I desire to move, Mr. Chairman, is as follows:
In clause 100, in line one, insert "and" between "sailor" and "commercial" and in line two strike out "or other person."
Amendment agreed to and section as amended agreed to.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think we have dealt with section 101. If not I would move to reconsider it.


Georges Henri Boivin: Clause 101 is still open.


Mr. BUREAU:: That is about the Canada Temperance Act is it not?


Hugh Guthrie: I move that clause 101 as printed in the Bill be struck out and the following be substituted therefore:
101. Whenever under the Canada Temperance Act a vote is to be taken, the procedure to be followed shall, in lieu of the procedure therein directed, be the procedure laid down in this Act with such modifications as the Chief Electoral Officer may direct as being necessary by reason of the difference in the nature of the question to be submitted, and with such omissions as he may specify on the ground that compliance with the procedure laid down is not required.
(2)	Any direction given by the Chief Electoral Officer for a modification of or omission from the procedure directed by this Act shall be published by him in the Canada Gazette at least four weeks before the day upon which the vote is to be taken.
(3)	Notwithstanding anything in this Act, the list of voters as finally revised and completed for use in the Provincial eleotion in the province of Ontario, held in the month of October, 1919, shall be used without revision for any vote in that province under this section taken before the 31st day of December, 1920.
I may say, Mr. Chairman, that Ithe difficulty under the section as first drawn is this:	In the Canada Temperance Amendment Act passed in 1919 certain provisions were incorporated in the amendment in regard to the taking of the vote. One that

occurs to me at the present dime is that the hours of the polling are stated in the amendment, and those hours are the old hours between nine o'clock in Ithe morning and five o'clock in the afternoon. Representations have been made that these hours are not, under modern conditions, sufficient to enable all 'the votes of men and women to be polled either at an election or a referendum, and the persons making the representations prefer that the new hours proposed in the presenlt Bill be adopted for the purpose of the referendum.
Then there is a great deal of unnecessary machinery in the present Bill if you try to apply it merely to a referendum vote. All Ithe provisions about nominations of candidates, and so on, that will not be applicable to simply the referendum vote. So that in order to adapt Ithe machinery in the present Bill to a referendum vote it is necessary that it should undergo some modification and the proposal is simply this: That when a vote is to be taken on a referendum, the machinery of the present Bill shall be the machinery under which the vote is taken. If in any case ilt is not adapted to the referendum, the Chief Electoral Office has power so to decide, and his decision is to be published four weeks before the vote in the Canada Gazette.
The other question that is covered in this amendment is the vote to be taken in the province of Ontario next autumn. As the House is aware there was a provincial list prepared in that province last October. I do' not think that it will be officially one year old by the date contemplated for the referendum volte; it may be a day or two more or a day or two less than that, but it will be in the neighbourhood of twelve months since the list was finally completed. It has been considered that in order to avoid expense that list might be deemed absolute and complete for -the purpose of the referendum vote. Any representations that have been made to me have been in favour of such a course. It was a provincial list of recent adaptation, or preparation, and I have heard no objection-no serious objection at all events-to the course proposed, and thalt course would certainly save all the cost of preparing new lists for that important or unimportant event. I therefore move, Mr. Chairman, that the clause be amended in the way indicated in the amendment I have just read.


Jacques Bureau: Before you put the
amendment may I put a question. The clause as it stood in the Bill we are now 245i
passing, would apply in full in case of a referendum under the Canada Temperance Act. Under the amendment I understand that it will be left to the Chief Electoral Officer to determine what parts of the Act are to apply and what parts are to be omitted. Do I understand rightly?


Hugh Guthrie: He will determine what parts of the Act have to be modified.


Jacques Bureau: He is to have the right to make modifications?


Hugh Guthrie: The amendment proposes that the Act shall apply, but that if in certain cases it has to be modified, the Chief Electoral Officer shall make the necessary modifications and publish them in the Canada Galzette four weeks before the voting date. It is only in minor cases that trouble could arise. In our Act we fix a certain time within which certain things are to be done, such as the nomination of candidates, the revision of lists, and so on-things which will not apply in an ordinary referendum vote. This amendment is proposed in order to clarify the matter and give the Chief Electoral Officer power to say what modifications are necessary.


Jacques Bureau: Is the restriction about the Ontario lists made because of the understanding that in certain cities if the lists were two years old they could not be used?


Hugh Guthrie: No, this is independent of that understanding. This is merely for the purpose of avoiding throughout the province of Ontario the preparation of. new lists for the purpose of this Bill. There is one clerical error in the amendment as you read it, Mr. Chairman. In subsection 3 the phrase "general election in the province," should be "provincial election in the province."


Jacques Bureau: Call it "general provincial election."


Hugh Guthrie: I think we should call it "provincial." We always , carry in our minds the distinction between a provincial and a general election.


Jacques Bureau: That is right.


Hugh Guthrie: This is entirely apart
from the matter raised by my hon. friend from Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau), which will come under section 32. I see no objection to providing in that section that lists up to two years old may be used as the basis. That was suggested by my hon. friend in regard to certain cities in the province of Quebec-


Jacques Bureau: Five cities.


Hugh Guthrie: Where there was a revision of the lists every two years. I think the two-year qualification might apply throughout Canada-tout we have not come to that section yet.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: When this section was held over for further consideration I think it was felt that if the machinery to be used was the machinery set forth in the Act as now drafted, it would be very expensive for taking the vote under the Canada Temperance Act. On the other hand, if the Bill as it .stands is to be amended on the lines previously discussed here so as to make the lists already prepared for the provinces apply for federal purposes. I think there would be no objection to passing this section now. But I am assuming that the minister intends to consider the amendments which he placed on Hansard, and will take them up in committee; and I am assuming also that they will meet with the approval of the House.


Hugh Guthrie: I think when the House last discussed the question I stated very distinctly that these were merely suggestions, that they were not moved as amendments, and my hon. friend must not go on the assumption that I in any way intend to abide by them. They do not affect the question under discussion. No matter what we decide under section 32, we must assume that a vote will have to be taken in two, and perhaps three provinces this fall; nnd this is only a general clause to avoid as far as possible any difficulty between administration under this Act and the Canada Temperance Act. For instance, the ballot papers will be different; there will be no names of candidates, but the electors will be asked to vote for or against the memorandum; the instructions to voters will be different; the sample Bill will be different; the forms of oath have to be changed; these are matters which we think we can safely leave to the Chief Electoral Officer, particularly when he has to give four weeks' notice in the Canada Gazette of any changes he makes.


Jacques Bureau: I think the power is too broad. The Chief Electoral Officer might make any modifications he likes and who-


Hugh Guthrie: Any necessary modification.


Jacques Bureau: There is no control even by the Governor in Council or by the Secre-

tary of State and the Chief Electoral Officer becomes the absolute court of last resort. True he publishes any modifications or omissions in the Official Gazette. But supposing he does where is the remedy. Any complainant can only go to the Chief Electoral Officer and if the Chief Electoral Officer chooses to consider the complaint he mav but otherwise the complainant's remedy is exhausted. If there was some authority over the Chief Electoral Officer, then the party feeling aggrieved would have the satisfaction of appealing to that higher authority. Tit seems to me that vesting this absolute power in the Chief Electoral Officer is not good policy.


Hugh Guthrie: He has not absolute power.


Jacques Bureau: There is no one to restrict him.


Hugh Guthrie: He has power only to make such modifications ais may be necessary to adapt this Act to the special conditions. I can see another way of accomplishing the same purpose, but I think it will take three or four weeks to do it; we will just have to pass duplicate sections and make special provisions for everything we do under the Election Act.


Jacques Bureau: No.


Hugh Guthrie: It is only in some minor respects that there can be any conflict.


Jacques Bureau: We can fix it by making the action of the Chief Electoral Officer subject to the approval of the Governor in Council or the Secretary of State.


Hugh Guthrie: I think it would be better to make the Chief Electoral Officer supreme than to make him subordinate to the Secretary of State or the Government. The idea was to leave the matter in charge of a man
s far as possible removed from political influence.


Jacques Bureau: Some contract.


Hugh Guthrie: It is.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: Now Mr. Chairman, if I might discuss clause 76, leaving clause 32 in the meantime? I will inform the House of the reason.


Georges Henri Boivin: Clause 76 can be discussed, but it cannot be adopted.


Hugh Guthrie: That is the point. It is in order to determine some principle upon

which this question may he settled so that I may introduce the necessary resolution for consideration of the committee, as this clause will involve the expenditure of public money.


Georges Henri Boivin: Very good. Clause 76 

Fees and expenses of election officers.


Hugh Guthrie: The difficulty, I may
point out, is this. We have sought to establish >a scale of fees for all officers who take part in the work of an election, and the difficulty has arisen from the fact that all constituencies are not alike. Difficulties have to be overcome in some of the remote constituencies which are not met with in ordinary city constituencies; consequently the fees payable in outlying districts should be more than those payable in compact, settled constituencies in the older provinces. One scale of fees will not give general satisfaction. Information is forthcoming, particularly in regard to the referendum votes which are contemplated during the coming fall, that returning officers and deputy returning officers cannot be secured at anything like the old scale of fees. It has been pointed out to me that in some ridings in New Brunswick and tihie Yukon and in some of the more remote parts of Saskatchewan and Alberta a considerable increase of fees is necesary in order to procure the necessary officials, and the same thing will have to be done in the unorganized districts of Ontario and in some constituencies in the provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. So the proposal is that instead of settling upon one scale of fees for the whole of Canada the Chief Electoral Officer siball himself fix a scale of fees after making full inquiry into the circumstances pertaining to each electoral district. He will have to have in his office a pretty full record of each riding. He will have to know all the cities, towns and villages in each riding, the population and the distances, and he will be the person best able, I think, to prescribe a satisfactory schedule of fees. So that the proposal I make to the committee is that the clause as printed in the Bill be not adopted but that a new clause to this effect be adopted:
Upon the recommendation of the Chief Electoral Officer, the Governor General in Counci' may take a tariff of fees, costs, allowances, and expenses to be paid and allowed to returning officers and other persons employed at or with respect to elections under this Act, and may from time to time revise and amend such tariff.
That would be to omit subsections 1, 2 and 3 as now drawn and to allow 4, 5, 6, and 7 to stand with the addition of the clause
that I have just read. If that arrangement-meets with the approval of the committee I can have a resolution introduced along these lines. We cannot pass section 7!>
until a resolution has been adopted in the committee, and I think it would be well to settle upon some policy in Tegard to the matter. I have no special policy to offer; I merely suggest this as the most practical way of settling a difficult question.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It depends
very much upon who is appointed as Chief Electoral Officer and how he is to be chosen. Has the minister any information to give the committee on that point5


Hugh Guthrie: I might be able to give it if the Chief Whip for the other side were Were. There was to be a conference this morning and there will be one this afternoon as soon as my hon. friend's representative returns. In the meantime, I do not know that the matter is definitely settled. However, I assure the committee that the man selected as Chief Electoral Officer will be some outstanding person in whom the House has confidence. A number of names have been discussed, but no final determination has yet been reached.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Does the minister intend to regard this appointment as one to be made by the Government of its own volition, or does he intend to have any conference on the subject one way or the other?


Hugh Guthrie: It is an appointment which the Government must settle ultimately and for which it must take the responsibility, although; I think it is advisable that the Government should consult before finally settling upon any definite appointment. But as in all cases the ultimate responsibility for the selection must rest with the Government. If the principle I now advocate be adopted, I can proceed to give notice so that there may be no delay in getting the matter into the committee stage. I can well understand that when we come to section 19, which has regard to the appointment of <a Chief Electoral Officer, this proposal concerning fees will be urged as one of the reasons why we must have an absolutely fair and impartial and outstanding man for that position.


Mr. BELAND:: Will the scale of fees
be recommended to the Governor in Council for each general election?


Hugh Guthrie: I do not know that ilt
would be a permanent scale of fees, because there is no doubt that at the present time we have to pay more than alfc any other time in the country's history. That condition may not continue. The clause as drawn would give the Chief Electoral Offi-[DOT]>eer power to make recommendations from time to time. I think he would have to make five or six different scales of fees, one to apply in cities; one in semi-urban and semi-rural ridings, compact in size and distance; another in ridings totally rural; another in unsettled portions of Canada where the distances are very great. All these matters will have Ito be considered and some scale adopted which will apply to groups of constituencies which are similarly situated.


Mr. TURGEON:: I quite approve of the
suggestion made by the minister. For instance, the county of Gloucester, which I have the honour to represent, has a coast two hundred miles in length, and includes two islands, Miscou island and Shippigan island. Alt certain times of the year, especially in spring and fall, it becomes very difficult to cross the harbours and to gain access to these islands. Particularly is this the case when, as very often happens, the election is held lalte in the year. During the last five or six elections there have been complaints from the returning officers that the fees allowed were not sufficient. The suggestion made by the minister, therefore, will be heartily approved by the people of the north shore of New Brunswick.
Mr.	MOW AT:	I am quite sure
that the returning officer in the country has a great	deal to do. But
it is also true that in Ithe last election the returning officers in the cities worked on the basis of inadequate fees, as allowed by the Auditor General. There was trouble all over Canada in that regard, and if Ithe fees are not substantially increased it will be difficult to get competent, well-instrudted men to take these jobs at the next election. I noticed that in connection with the prohibition referendum in Ontario the returning officers in Toronto put in bills amounting on the average to $2,000. The matter went before the County Judge and he cut the amounts down to some extent, the average amount allowed in Toronto for that election being about $1,500. Well, that is a great deal more than the amount allowed by the Dominion. I hope that the Chief Electoral Officer will not be guided only by opinions and experiences here in

Ottawa; thalt he will receive recommendations and suggestions from those who are familiar with elections in the different constituencies so Ithat he will not go wrong in fixing his scale of fees. Unless we provide that these officials shall not have their legitimate expenses cut down, we shall have difficulty in getting a suitable class of men.


Mr. CLEMENTS:: I wish to bring to the attention of the minister two British Columbia constituencies, namely^ Skeena, represented by my hon. friend (Mr. Peck) and Comox-Alberni represented by myself. These two constituencies comprise an area of 1,600 miles, north, south, east and west, and I had hoped that the minister would provide in this Bill some way of taking care of those constituencies by enumeration.


Hugh Guthrie: It is the consensus of opinion of the committee that the proposal I made would be more satisfactory than the old rule of having a schedule, and acting on that, I will give notice of resolution in the ordinary way because the matter will have to come up by way of resolution.
Section 76 stands.


Hugh Guthrie: If the committee will agree, I should like very much to have the question of forms settled at this point. The forms as originally drawn were, I am afraid, taken without very much revision from former Franchise Acts, and in the form printed they are not altogether suitable to the provisions of the present Bill. We have, however, had the very able assistance of the Deputy Speaker of the House in going over these forms with a committee of members, and a number of amendments have been submitted
3	p.m. which I think will remedy the defects in the forms as printed in the Bill. I understand it will be necessary for me to make a separate motion as regards to each form. If the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Mackenzie King) is agreeable, perhaps we could do this as a mere matter of form, because I do not think we are competent, sitting here as a committee, to decide on the merits of these amendments without a great deal of study. The matter was left in the hands of a subcommittee who, I think, did their work pretty faithfully, and I would be prepared to accept the amendments as they stand.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I understand these forms have been gone over by members of both sides of the House with the assistance of the Deputy Speaker, and that the committee who have gone over them

have been unanimous in their conclusions as to amendments to the forms as they now stand. Under the circumstances, I will certainly agree.


Hugh Guthrie: I move that we do now proceed to the consideration of the Forms in Schedule 1 to this Bill which have not yet been adopted and at the same time I move, with the unanimous consent of the committee, to reconsider and amend Forms A, G, P, V, DD, EE, FF and GG which have been agreed to, but to which some slight amendments have been found' necessary.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
On Form A.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form A by striking out in the 6th line the words " of the county or as the case may be," and by substituting therefor the following words. "(Insert name, legal addition and residence of returning officer)," and by inserting after the words "for the electoral district of ... ." in the 15th and 16th lines, the words "in the province of . ."


Jacques Bureau: It is very hard to follow the amendments, but as the matter has been agreed on, it is all right. One cannot reasonably form any opinion as regards amendments to insert words.


Hugh Guthrie: This is purely formal. There are not many amendments in substance.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form F.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form F by striking out the word "the" at the end of the 1st line and by substituting therefor the words "polling division No. "; by striking out in the 3rd, 4th and 5th lines the words in the province of Alberta or the Yukon Territory or as the case may be"; by striking out in the 5th and 6th lines the words "being one of the persons permitted by law to affirm in civil cases" and by striking out in the 5th and 6tu lines of the certificate the words "in the province of or as the case may be." Amendment agreed to.


On Form G:: 


Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form G by striking out the word "of" in the 3rd line of page 80 and leaving no blank space thereafter; by replacing the word "six" at the beginning of the 9th line by the words *"the hour of " and by adding at the
end of the Form the following note: Insert the hour of six o'clock in the forenoon for urban polling divisions and the hour of eight o'clock in the forenoon for rural polling divisions. That is to make this conform with the amendment which we made to the section.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form K:: 


Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form K by inserting in the 1st line or heading of the tabulated list of names, after the word "name" the words "family name first"; by inserting after the word "residence" the words "street and number where possible", and by striking out after the word "remarks" the following words: "this column is for the use of the Poll Clerk on polling day."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Jean-Joseph Denis: I should like to know
whether this will obviate the difficulty which I have already pointed out. I said that under the law as drafted the surname of a woman might just, as well be placed on the list as the surname of her husband, and this was done with great inconvenience in the Quebec East by-election. Supposing a woman whose name is Mary Smith marries a man whose name is Edward Blake. Her name may appear on the list as Mary Smith Blake, or Mary Smith, or Mary Blake. The intention is to use the Christian name of the woman and the surname of her husband; and in order that that end may be attained, it should be clearly stated in rule (6) of Schedule A to clause 32 that this provision is contemplated. I would, therefore, suggest that, after the following words in paragraph (a) of rule (6), "such list shall show the names thereon alphabetically arranged according to surnames" the following words "a married woman or a widow to be inscribed on the list under her own Christian name but under her husband's surname" be inserted. That would be perfectly plain, and then the clause would continue:
And shall have the letter (w).
And so on. Then you would know that a married woman is to be inscribed on the list under her Christian name but under her husband's surname. In that way there would be no possible mistake.


Hugh Guthrie: We have noted that under clause 32 where it comes in. I shall be glad if my hon. friend will move that

amendment when we come to clause 32. We have it in effect in our notes.


Hugh Guthrie: I move to further
amend Form K by striking out in the 3rd and 4th lines of the second certificate the wardis "or if mo correction is made, as finally approved" and by substituting therefor the words "and 'Corrected" and by striking out the two* last lines of the said Form.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form K I:: 


Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form K 1 Iby striking out in the 2nd line of paragraph (1) the word "every," by inserting after the words "polling division" the words " No.... (or Nos.... as the case may 'be)" .and 'by inserting in itihe 3rd lane after the word's "electoral district that is" the words "or are."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to further amend Form K 1, by inserting after the word ''persons" in the 1st line of paragraph (3) the words "who reside within Ithe said polling division," Iby striking out all .the words after the wprd " Registrar" at the end of the said form and by adding thereto the following note "Add for posting a copy of subsection (1) of section 6 of this Act."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form K 2:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form K 2, by striking out where they appear at the end of the said form the following words "Sworn before ime this....day of
[DOT] [DOT] [DOT] ...A.D	 at	 Signature
	Registrar."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Fom K 3:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form K 3, by striking out all the words after the word "Registrar" in the next to the last line of the said form.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form K 5:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form K 5, by inserting after the word "for" in the 2nd line oif paragraph (1) the words "polling division No... .of"; by striking out in the 2nd and 3rd lines of paragraph (2) the words "list of electors" and substituting therefor the words "index hook"; by striking out in the 1st line of paragraph (3) the words "upon the said list" and substituting therefor the words "in the said index book" and by striking out the word "list" to the 2nd line of paragraph (4) and Substituting therefor the words "index book."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
. On Schedule 1:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend
.Schedule I of the Act by inserting after Form K 5, the following form:
Form K 6.
Form of Index Book to be used by the Registrar in compiling the list of voters- for each Polling Division under his jurisdiction, in compliance with Section 32 of the Dominion Elections Act.
Form for First Page.
Electoral District of	
Polling Division No	 Comprising (Giving the limits)
Name Family name first.	Occupation or addition.	Residence Street and Number where possible.	Remarks.
			
Form for second and subsequent pages.	Continuation of Polling Division No	
Name Family name first.	Occupation or addition.	Residence Street and Number where possible.	Remarks.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to. 
I
Hugh Guthrie: I move to further amend {Schedule 1 of the Act by inserting after the new Form K 6, and before Form L the following form:
Form K 7.
Form of Certificate and Notice to Electors to l>e used by the Registrars in Complying with Rule 4 of Schedule B to Section 32.
Form of Certificate.
I oesrtify that the following is a true copy of
the Voters' Dist for Polling Division No	
(or Nos.... as the case may be) of thj Electoral District of	as prepared
by me for use in the election of a member of the House of Commons for the said electoral
district, now pending. Dated at	
this	day of	19..
Registrar.
Notice to Electors.
Notice is hereby given that I will attend
and remain at	on the
five following days, namely	
between the hours of Two and Six o'clock in the afternoon, at which time and place I may be found by the electors, as provided by Rule 3 of Schedule B to section 32 of the Dominion Elections Act.
Registrar.


Mr. ROSS:: Have you added the Jurat to Form K 5?
, Mr. GUTHRIE: It was added ait a previous sitting.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
, On Form L:
, Mr. GUTHRIE: I move to amend Form L by toserting in the 1st line thereof, after
the words "Electoral District of	"
,the words "in the Province of	
by inserting after the words " or town" in the 8th line thereof the words "or village" and hy striking out in the 16th, 17th and 18th lines, the words "from the hour of six in the forenoon and kept open until the afternoon" 'and by substituting therefor the following iwords "at the hour of six O'clock in the forenoon and qept o>pen until the ,hou'r of six o'clock in the afternoon in urlban poEUing divisions, and will be opened at the hour of slight o'dlock in the forenoon and kept open until the hour of six o^cloek in the afternoon in rural (polling divisions."
Amendment agreed to.
The committee will remember that we changed the clause in the Act ito make the hour of eight o'clock apply in rural divisions.
Amendment agreed to.
On Form L-Proclamation of returning officer:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to further amend Form L by inserting as a new paragraph, at the bottom of page 86, the following:
"The territory comprised within the cities, towns and incorporated villages of	
shall be, for the purposes of the Dominion Elections Act, known as urban polling divisions and the voter's lists shall be prepared and completed therein under the rules set forth in schedule A to section 32 of the said Act. The remainder of the territory comprised within the electoral district shall be, for the purpose of the said Act, known as rural polling divisions and the voters' lists shall be prepared and completed therein under the rules set forth in schedule B to section 32 of the said Act."
This is to make it absolute where the division is rural and where it is urban it being the duty of the Chief Electoral Officer Ito determine it in advance of the election in order that he may give the returning officer instructions.


James Hamilton Ross: My hon. friend will find that under the old Act the proclamation set forth the polling places in detail and the lists were ready on nomination day.


Hugh Guthrie: Formerly the proclamation set out the boundaries. I do not know why that provision has been omitted here unless it is for the purpose of saving the expense of printing.


James Hamilton Ross: When nomination took place four days before the election, as it did under the War-time Elections Act, there might be some excuse for announcing the polling places only on nomination day.


Hugh Guthrie: It is two weeks now.


James Hamilton Ross: I do not see why the returning officer, when he issues his proclamation which will at least be a month before the election, should not say where the polling places are going to be. I do not see any reason for departing from the old practice.


Hugh Guthrie: There is provision for
nomination day, for issuing notice where the polls are to be held, the length of time for which they are to be kept open, the hours and all that. This is only a duplication of that.


James Hamilton Ross: I am quite well aware of
that but this notice will only he given ten days before polling day.


Hugh Guthrie: It is two weeks before polling day. It is a reasonable time.


Mr. EOSS:: It would be better to follow the old practice.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form M-nomination paper, etc.:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form M by striking out in the second and third lines the words "names, residences and addition or description of person or persons nominated" and by substituting therefor the words "name, residence and addition or description of person nominated."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form N-oath of attestation of the nomination papei:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form N by inserting before the words "Justice of the Peace" at the end thereof, Ifche words "Eeturning Officer" and by inserting after, the same words, the words "or .as the case may be."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form P-notice of grant of a poll:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form P by inserting below the words "electoral district of" in the 1st line thereof, the words "Province of" and by striking out in lines 3, 4 and 5 on page 89 the words "from the hour of six in the forenoon till the hour of six in the afternoon in each of the following divisions, that is to say" and by substituting therefor the following words "at the hour of six o'clock in the forenoon and kept open until the hour of six o'clock in the afternoon in urban polling divisions and will be opened at the hour of eight o'clock in the forenoon and kept open until the hour of six o'clock in the afternoon in rural polling divisions, as follows:


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form T-l-certificate to deputy returning officers:
Mr. GUT  HUME@: Then it becomes necessary to insert a new form after Form T to be known as T-l, page 94.
I move to amend schedule 1 of the Act by inserting after Form T the following form:
Form T-l.
Certificate to be given to a Deputy Returning Officer, a Poll Clerk, a Candidate or a Candidate's Agent under Section 53 SS 1 of the Dominion Elections Act, when required.
No	
This is to certify that	
is a qualified elector at Polling Division No.

in the Electoral District of	
but that in consequence of his having been appointed to act in the capacity of '(see note)
	at Polling Division
No	 he is entitled to vote at said last
mentioned Polling Division.
Dated at	this	day of...., 19..
Revising Officer or Registrar.
'Insert Deputy Returning Officer or Poll
Clerk or Candidate, or Agent for	
one of the Candidates of this election, as the case may be.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Farm V-form of poll book:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form V by striking out in the heading of the tabulated list of voters, the words "qualification of voters" and by substituting therefor the words "names of persons vouching for voter."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form Z-oath that voter is not disqualified under the Dominion Elections Act:
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form Zl by striking out the word "electors" in the title of the said form and substituting therefor the words "applicant who claims right to vote."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Form Z No. 1-oath to be taken by electors:
Mr. GUTHEIE;: I move to further amend Form Z No. 1 by adding after the words "such province" in the next to the last line of the said form, the following words:
or (that though you are disqualified in respect of race by the laws of this province, you are entitled to vote because you have served in the naval, military or air forces of Canada in the late war and you did produce to the registrar upon the making up of the voters list a discharge from the said naval, military or air forces of Canada and you do also herewith produce such discharge).
That is to meet the case of an Oriental who has served in the Canadian forces and who would otherwise be disqualified.
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I now beg to amend Schedule 1, of the Act by inserting after Form X No. 1, the following form:
Form Z No. 2.
Oath to be taken by Electors who vouch for Applicant who claims right to vote.
You do swear that you are a qualified elector at this election for a member to serve in the House of Commons for the electoral district of
	(as the case may be) and that
you reside in polling division No... in the

said electoral district and that you know.
who has applied to have his name added to the voters list in said poling division, that the applicant is a British Subject and not an Indian ordinarily (resident on an Indian reservation that he (or she) is of the full age of twenty-one years and has ordinarily resided in Canada for at least twelve months immediately prior to this date and within this electoral district for at least two months immediately preceding the issue of the writ for this election and is now a resident in this polling division and is not disqualified in respect of race by the laws of this province from voting for a member of the Legislative Assembly of this province. So help you God.
It is the same oath practically as the applicant must take.
Amendment agreeu to.


Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form DD hy replacing the words "county of" where they appear in the marginal heading of the said form by the words "electoral district of".


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form EE by replacing the words "county of" where they appear in the marginal heading of the said form by the words "electoral district of".


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form FF by replacing the words "county of" where they appear in the marginal heading of the said form by the words "electoral district of".


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
. Mr. GUTHRIE: I move to amend Form GG by replacing the words "county of" where they appear in the marginal heading of the said form by the words "electoral district of".
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form SS by striking out the figures "99" in the 2nd line thereof and substituting therefor the figures "100."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend Form TT by striking out in the 3rd line of the title the words "16 and 17" and substituting the words "and 16;" also by replacing the figures "99" where they appear in the 5th and 17th lines by the figures "100," and by replacing the word "receiving" where it appears on the 2nd line of page 110 by the word "revising."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move that all the fo'-ms contained in Schedule 1 of the Act be consecutively numbered instead of lettered and that the necessary changes be made in the Bill accordingly.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
James Hamilton Ross: With respect to an elector voting at an advance poll the suggestion was made, and taken under consideration, as to whether he should not be obliged to take an oath instead of simply signing the form TT found at page 110.


Hugh Guthrie: I would not think it was
necessary. The elector gets his certificate from the proper officer who has a right to issue those certificates and who can swear him. Then when he comes to vote the possession of the certificate will be sufficient.


James Hamilton Ross: Some other man may take the certificate and use it. The elector has got to sign anyway so where is the harm of adopting some precaution?


Hugh Guthrie: You can swear the man as he comes up in the ordinary way as yon can any voter.


James Hamilton Ross: Then what is the use of putting this in at all. The elector has to sign his name on the certificate of identification so why not have him sworn. What is the objection?


Hugh Guthrie: I am told the object of that is to make sure that you have the right man. When he gets a certificate he has to sign his signature just as the banks require when they issue foreign bank cheques. When the elector goes to vote the officials can say, "Let us see your signature," and they can compare it Tight here.


James Hamilton Ross: I cannot see any reason for not making the change suggested if you want a real safeguard.


Hugh Guthrie: I think this is the procedure followed by the express companies when they issue money orders, as well as by the banks in the case of foreign cheques.


James Hamilton Ross: But this is very important.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think it can be better safeguarded than by the signature proposals.


James Hamilton Ross: In connection with Form UU, it is stated explicitly that the declaration provided for there is not made under oath. Very well, why not have the elector make the declaration under oath. If a man cannot vote except at an advance poll why not

require him to take an oath that his calling is such that he cannot vote at any other time.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not see why you should swear a railway man more than any other individual; I think that a railway man's vote should be taken as readily as anybody else's. This applies only to three classes of people and I would not impose upon them the necessity of taking an oath to get the ordinary rights to which they are entitled. We are safeguarding it in every possible way.


Jacques Bureau: This is a special privilege accorded to certain classes of men be-clause they will be absent from their homes on polling day. Does my hon. friend claim that if a man's name is not on the list he should not have to swear in order to be allowed to vote?


Hugh Guthrie: He certainly will.


Jacques Bureau: He may be as honest a man as any hon. member or any railway conductor. Why do you do it? Because that man is getting -a special privilege. Here is a man who is going to vote in advance of the election. To that extent he is getting a special privilege, and I contend that the argument put forward by my hon. friend is absolutely right, that he ought to swear that he is coming within the provisions of the Act giving him that privilege; otherwise his vote ought not to be taken.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It is not a
question of doubting the word of the railway men, it is really protecting them against impostors.


Hugh Guthrie: How does this work out? In the first place a man has to be on the voters' list. He goes to the presiding officer and says, "I want a certificate to enable me to vote at the advance polls," and as part of the procedure to avoid any "double crossing" we make him sign his name at the bottom of that certificate in the presence of .the returning officer. He goes to the advance poll, and he is bound by every oath prescribed under the law and can be sworn. What more swearing is necessary? We have double identification, we have the oath, we have the fact that his name is on the list, and we have his signature. Why don't you swear all the agents that go out to vote? They get special privileges.


Jacques Bureau: I may go to the returning officer and sign "Hugh Guthrie" instead of "Jacques Bureau." That is no evidence that I am the Minister of Militia.


Hugh Guthrie: People do not do that sort of thing. We are prescribing the safeguard that every bank in the country uses.


James Hamilton Ross: If this is necessary at all-


Hugh Guthrie: My hon. friend was
here when we went over this line by line,- why didn't he make his suggestion then? That is the difficulty,-after we get clauses settled members "butt in" at the last moment with suggestions.


Mr. PARDEE:: That does not apply to
hon. members on this side only.


James Hamilton Ross: I made the suggestion to my hon. friend and he said he thought it perfectly feasible and offered to submit it. If the declaration is to be taken at all by the railway men or the sailors or the commercial travellers, I do not see why it should not go on the schedule.


Hugh Guthrie: Every man can be
sworn at the polls in the ordinary way.
Mr. ROSS-:	That is true.


Hugh Guthrie: Then why have him
sworn twice?


Mr.   BOSS@: Then this declaration is not necessary at all.


Hugh Guthrie: The declaration is for
the purpose of identifying the man. It is his signature that identifies him.


James Hamilton Ross: I am speaking of UU now.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Guysborough):: There
is no other oath similar to this in the Act:
I declare that my employment or calling is such as to necessitate from time to time my absence from my ordinary {place of business or. from my ordinary place of residence.-
and so on. The oath is proposed to be given to the voter for the purpose of showing that he comes within the class that is to get the privilege, and talking of other affidavits does not fit this case at all.


Hugh Guthrie: Now I begin to see the light. That was not the point raised at all. The point raised was whether the man was entitled to vote.


John Howard Sinclair: No.


Hugh Guthrie: I am quite content that railway employees, sailors and commercial travellers shall have the right to go to advance polls and vote under the section as now drawn, and if any one is not content with the section let him move an amendment. The section has been submitted to these various classes of people and has been approved by them.

-Mr. MACKENZIE KING:	What is my
hon. friend's objection to providing that a *man who may not belong to one of these classes, but who presents himself at an advance poll should be asked to take an oath before he votes?


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think it necessary anyway as any such contingency is already guarded against.
Mr. -STEVENS: It is certainly unfair and to a certain degree, a reflection upon a group of voters to ask that they shall be particularly sworn as a whole when other voters are not required to be so sworn, especially in view of the fact, as the minster pointed out, that all voters are subject to take an oath is challenged. I submit that it would be very unwise to submit railway men, sailors and commercial travellers to a special oath, especially in view of this other fact, that they are subject to be sworn as all other citizens are subject to be sworn.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would point out that the three groups my hon. friend (Mr. Stevens) has mentioned are securing a privilege which is -accorded to no other class of the community. There is ground for a little difference there. But it is not a question of doubting the word of the railway man or of the sailor or of the commercial traveller; it is to protect members of these three groups against some outsider demanding the right to vote under this privilege. "


Mr. STEVENS:: I submit that all voters are subject to the same difficulty and danger. The usual practice is to swear a person not recognized by the poll clerk or by the scrutineer, and the same thing would apply in this case.


Hugh Guthrie: It is pretty thin skating for the leader of the Opposition to say that this proposal which he evidently wants to force upon the committee, is to protect these three classes. He knows that certain people do object to being sworn. He was present at the meeting when the hon. member for Shelburne and Queen's (Mr. Fielding urged in the most vehement manner that it would be an injustice to the people of Nova Scotia if they were compelled to take the oath before being allowed to vote, and he stated that they would not vote. Now my hon. friend the leader of the Opposition wants to impose the same obligation against these three classes. This clause was gone over line by line by the House and no objection was raised. I have
gone over it with the representatives of the commercial travellers and the railway men, and they have expressed their satisfacdua with it. However, that does not bind anybody, and if -hon. members opposite want to challenge this section let them move an amendment.


Jean-Joseph Denis: What opposition would
there be to make this form in the shape of a solemn declaration under the Canada Evidence Act? It would not be a sworn statement, and at the same time it would fulfil the object sought to be attained.


Hugh Guthrie: :	You can swear them
all if you want to.


Jean-Joseph Denis: No. The solemn declaration in the Canada Evidence Act was drawn especially to serve the purpose when you do not want to swear a person but in the meantime you want something which will have the same value as an oath.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not propose to
change it, Mr. Chairman.


[Stage Direction]
Schedule agreed to.
Mr GUTHRIE In connection with schedule 3 in that section, this schedule v as ui awn, I think, without consultation with the various interests and it is not as complete as it should be, and I am told places have been included where advance polls are not necessary. From the railroad point of view the following changes should be made with regard to the province of Alberta. They ask that the following places be struck out: Acme, Aldersyde, Banff, Cardston, Coutts, Frank, Lacombe, Langdon and -Stirling; and that there be added the following names: Red Deer, West Edmonton, and Hardisty. From the railway point of view they said it would not convenience any of their men to establish advance polls at the places I have enumerated, but that it would convenience some railway men if advanced polls were established at Red Deer, West Edmonton and Hardisty.
Mr. WHITE (Victoria):: What reasons have they offered for the establishing of advance polls at these three points?
Mr. 'GUTHRIE: The reason they offer is that it would be a convenience for railway employees.


William Henry White: What would the convenience be?


Hugh Guthrie: That they could utilize these advance polls, whereas if they did not have them some men might be deprived

of their votes. The Chief Electoral Officer has power to vary these schedules if necessary and to establish advance polls in other places. In British Columbia the railway men say that they do not require advance polls at Brodie, Donald, Kamloops Junction, Mission, Sicamous, Spence's Bridge, or Yank, but they ask that the following be included: Cranbrook, Nelson, and North Bend. Then, in Manitoba they say that they will not be convenienced by the establishment of advance polls at Molson or Vir-den, but they ask that the following be included in the list: Transcona, Elmwood and Fort Bouge. In New Brunswick they ask that Fairfield, Gibson, St. Stephen, and Woodstock be added; they are content with the list otherwise. In Nova Scotia they ask -that the following be added: Dartmouth, Glace Bay, Sidney Mines and Stellarton. In Ontario they do not ask for any advance polls at Berton, Chalk Biver, or Glencoe, but they ask that the following be added: Barrie, Kenora, Mimico, Sioux Lookout, Grant, Chatham, Wallaceburg, Kitchener. In Prince Edward Island they ask that Borden be added to the list. ' In Quebec they ask to add Tring Junction, Charney, Limoilou and Tourville. In Saskatchewan they think that Bulyea might be taken from the list, and they ask that the following names be added:	Neudorf, Sutherland,
Bredenbury, Colonsay, Lanigan, Lipton, Perdue, Strasbourg, Wilkie, Wynyard. I just wish to point out that the changes which I have mentioned to the committee are such as have been suggested by the Eailway Brotherhood. No representations whatever have been received by me from sailors or commercial travellers. I have no doubt there are not included in the list other points which should be enumerated, and if there is any reason for adding to the list, the committee should hear the names now if hon. members are ready to give them.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. WHITE (Victoria, Alberta):: I would suggest that Camrose be added to the Alberta list.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Herbert Sylvester Clements: I would suggest that Parksville Junction be added to the British Columbia list. It is a junction point on the E. and N. railway.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. DAVIDSON:: I would suggest that Amherst, Windsor and Annapolis Boyal be

added to the Nova Scotia list. Windsor is the shire town of Hants and there is a large railway population there.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. KEEFER:: I would suggest that
Ignaee, a divisional point between Fort William and Kendra on the Canadian Pacific railway, where engine crews are Changed in part, be added to the Ontario list. I think it has been overlooked by the railway men.


Mr.   EIJLEB@: I would suggest that Waterloo and Elmira be added to the Ontario list.


Mr. SMITH:: I would suggest that Lindsay and Whitby be added to the Ontario list.


Hugh Guthrie: Yes, they are sort of railway terminals and I think they should both be added.


Mr. CLARK (Bruce North):: I would suggest that Wiaxton and IStentthampton be added to the Ontario list.


Hugh Guthrie: I see Lindsay was in the printed list.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. WEIGHT:: Has the minister struck the name Wainwright from the Saskatchewan list. Wainwright is in Alberta not in Saskatchewan.


Hugh Guthrie: !Is Wainwright a place where we should have an advance poll.
Mr, WEIGHT: Yes.


Hugh Guthrie: I move that we transfer Wainwright from the Alberta list to the Saskatchewan list.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. MACNUTT:: What is the reason given for adding Lipton to the list for Saskatchewan? There are no railroad men there that I know of. Balcarres might be called a railroad town.


Hugh Guthrie: The reason given was that it would be a convenience to the railway men if Lipton was included.


Mr. GLASS:: I understand the Chief Electoral Officer has certain powers to provide hr adding names of any places where it -light be found desirable to establish advance polls although these places may not be enumerated in this list.


Hugh Guthrie: Yes, later on he may.


Samuel Francis Glass: 
Hugh Guthrie: He must live in the electoral district in which the poll is established; otherwise he cannot vote.


Samuel Francis Glass: Then .a great injustice would be done to quite a number of railway men who have their homes in the township outside the limits of a city. If
4 p.m. there be a sufficient number to provide advance polls for them, the Act should provide for establishing advance polls in such districts. There are 100 or 150 railway men and possibly as many commercial travellers who live in the townships adjoining. Westminster and London, outside the city limits altogether, and who have men opportunity to poll their votes. There should not be discrimination in favour of those who live in cities.


Hugh Guthrie: There is no discrimination in the Act. If you have fifty such men and make a representation to the Chief Electoral Officer, you can have an advance poll established. If not more than fifty votes are pciled at an advance poll at the next election the Chief Electoral Officer shall .strike that poll off the list. It will be in the nature of an experiment. There may not be more than ten or fifteen votes polled at some advance polls at the next election, and in such a case the advance poll will cease to exist.
. Schedule 3 as amended agreed to.


Hugh Guthrie: I think we might now discuss sedtion 63. The only question that has arisen in regard to this section since we last discussed it is whether it would really be necessary to have two. men vouch for a man who. comes on polling day to have his name added. It the western polls it may be difficult to find two. men who could conveniently be brought to swear thait some person is entitled to vote. It seems that in Saskatchewan .and Alberta where the system is now in vogue, they have no. difficulty. But it ,was represented to me that it might be well, as an additional safeguard, to provide that two men should be required to vouch for ^n,y one who desired to have his name added on- election day. The suggestion ba.s now [DOT] been made, however, that in some remote places (where the population is isparse and the number of voters on the list none too great, some difficulty might be experienced in securing two. men tio, vouch, and the
question is whether one would not suffice. Personally, I have no particular views on the point.
, Mr. MACKENZIE KING: Each of the parties would be represented 'by his agent, ,who could serve as one of the persons required to vouch. That would overcome the difficulty.
) Mir. GUTHRIE: I dlo net know that the ,agent is .altogether the class olf man we desire to. have vouch. He might be a city scrutineer sent out 'tio the country. I would rather have two bona fide residents of the division. The question now is whether one .would not be buffioient.
, Mr. MACKENZIE KING: Let u-s understand the proposal As the law stands, any person, may present himself at the poll and claim the right to volte without any one youehJng for him. It is now proposed that two persons .shall vouch for Mm, .and there is 'a suggestion, that one is sufficient. One man will have to take the oath?
, M.r, 'GUTHEIE: The man himself and his surety as well will have to take the oath.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The surety is to be resident in the district?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes.	'


William Henry White: I think it may be found difficult to have even one man vouch for a voter. A man living twenty or more .miles away might ride into .a polling division anid foe absolutely unable to find any one to. identify foilm. Comparatively new .settlers do not very quickly become acquainted, and some man might be a British eubjedt resident in hie district for some time land yet find it difficult to secure identification ait the polling division. I have read of la main quitting roads for miles to. get to West Edmonton to vote, and if no one acquainted with him happened to. be around he could not be vouched for.


Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend clause 63 by striking out subclause 1 and substituting therefor the following subclause:
At polling stations In rural polling divisions the deputy returning officer shall, while the poll is open if required by any person whose name is not on the voters' list and who is vouched for .by an elector who is a resident in such polling division, administer to such person oath number (1) in form "Z" No. 1 of schedule one to this Act and to such other person an oath in. form "Z" No. 2 of schedule one to this Act, and such oath having been taken toy the applicant person and by such other person, the deputy returning officer shall at once cause such applicant person's name to be added to the voters' list, with the word " sworn " written thereafter, and subject to the next following'

subsection of this Act, such applicant person may thereupon vote.
I move to further amend idliauise 63, subclause (2) iby adding in line 30 on plage 44 df the Billl alter tlbe word "make" the following words:
including the name of the person who vouched for the applicant person.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Should not the person who vouches be an elector whose name appears on the voters' list?


Hugh Guthrie: You will find the word "elector" defined do the Adt.
, Mr. PARDEE: Elector means any person qualified to vote at ia Dominion election, whether his name iis or is not on any list otf voters.


Hugh Guthrie: Perhaps voter would be better.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Yes; the definition of "voter" would cover the point.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not so sure that "voter" would .be the, beslt term to use in this connection. I think it would be better to use the word "elector," with the qualifying wohds: "whose name appears on the voters' lisit."


Hugh Guthrie: We had a discussion in our committee and we decided on the words "an elector who is a resident in such polling division."
Mr. PARDEE,: "And whose name appears upon the list."


Hugh Guthrie: "Who is vouched for
by an elector." What do you want in addition to that?


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: "Whose name appears
upon the voters' list."


Hugh Guthrie: "And who is a resident ?"	.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Yes.


Hugh Guthrie: The amendment will
[DOT]therefore . read:
(1) At polling stations in rural polling divisions the deputy returning officer shall, while the poll is open if required by any person whose name Is not on the voters' list and who is vouched for by an elector whose name appears upon a voters' list and who is a resident in such polling division, administer to such person oath number (1) in Form "Z" No. 1 of schedule one to this Act and such other person an oath in Form "Z" No. 2 of schedule one to this Act, and such oath having been taken by the applicant person and by such other person, the deputy returning officer shall at once cause such applicant person's name to foe added to the voters' list, with the word " sworn " written

thereafter, and subject to the next following subsection of this Act, such applicant person may thereupon vote.
Then we will have to make another amendment if it is the intention of the form to cover two persons instead of one person. I move to further amend clause 63, subclause (2) by adding in line 30, on page 44 of the Bill, after the word "make" the . following words:	"including the name of
the person who vouched for the applicant person."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move that we return
to the discussion of section 32 I think this leaves 32 and 19 practically the only undisposed of sections. If the Naturalization Act is passed it may be necessary to amend section 29 but in the meantime we can let it stand.
Motion agreed Ito
On section 32-preparation of lists of voters:


Hugh Guthrie: On section 32, I think it would he the wisest for us to pursue the policy as originally drawn and submitted Ito the House. It has been very carefully examined by the officers of the Government and by some gentlemen who are expert in such matters. There are clerical errors in it as printed. Some amendments will have to be made to the section. Some have already been suggested hut the section is one which the Government will ask the House ,to adopt. It is true there have been a great many suggestions of various kinds. We had a conference of members representing both sides of the House wilth a view to seeing if we could not arrive at some satisfactory basis upon which we could all agree. Apparently that is not possible. The difficulties ahead of us are such thalt we cannot reconcile them all. I think it would he far better to adopt one general principle for the whole of Canada than to make exceptions here and (there for this province or that province. The scheme which was originally adopted when the Bill was framed was to adopt a general principle throughout Canada. As the committee is aware, the principle upon which the Bill was framed was that all the provincial lists should be adopted on the basis of the franchise in any province where there was a provincial list not more than twelve months old. I think that was a good principle. But it has been poinlted out that in one particular province there are five or six cities where there is not an annual list but

where there is a list prepared every two years and that is in Ithe province of Quebec. It seems Ithat in that province there is an annual lis-t save in the case of five or six cities w'here there is only a biennial list. The hon. member for IThree Rivers (Mr. Bureau) desires that difficulty to be obviated and I see no reason against doing it by making a general provision to the effect that we will accept as the basis .of our franchise the lists of all Ithe provinces were not more than two years old. If in any province there is no list which is not more than two years of age a new list will have to be prepared from beginning to end but if we have a lislt in any province not more than two years of age we will take that list as the basis, carrying it forward under the provisions of section 32 as laid down in this Aot. It will give us uniformity in every province of Canada. The only question, upon which I think there might be some criticism is perhaps on the question of expense. It is going to be a fairly expensive Act to administer but I believe it will give us as complete, as up to date and as honest and fair .a voters' list as we have ever had in this country. For these reasons, if we have a little extra expense, we can well afford it. It is only every four or five years that Ithe machinery under this Act is put in operation. Spread the expense over four or five years and it does not appear to be so great. Suggestions which were made when we had our conference in May were that in the rural divisions-not urban, because we propose no change there-but in rural divisions where there were lists in existence which were not more than two years of age there should be no registrar or enumerator appointed to prepare lists; in other words that we should adopt the provincial lists giving persons whose names had been omitted Ithe right to appeal to the county judge or revising officer to have their names included but giving them the power which we undoubtedly give them under section 63 to go to the returning officer on election day, .obtain a ballot and volte. That would relieve us of the necessity of appointing a large number of rural registrars. But if it should happen that an election came on when there were no lists under two years of age we would have to undergo the expense anyway. In twelve divisions and in the unorganized territories of Ontario; in some in Quebec; and in some in British Columbia we would have to undergo the expense anyway. Because in those cases they have no lists-no up-to-date 246
lists-there is a floating population in those places and there must be an enumeration if-


Mr. GAUVREAU:: There is no part of the province of Quebec in that condition now.


Hugh Guthrie: I understood there were two ridings in the province of Quebec as to which that was true?


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: A new law was passed last year.


Hugh Guthrie: One of the ridings that was mentioned to me was Gaspd. At any rate in the other provinces these difficulties -would arise. I think it would be far better to adopt a general rule and a uniform practice namely, that where we have to prepare lists-whether or not there are provincial lists-there shall be registrars in the rural divisions to prepare them in accordance with section 32 as drawn, and that we follow the proceedings laid down under section 32 in regard to our urban lists as well. Then, with the amendments which I have to propose to that section we will have a reasonably workable procedure. I do not think it will be cumbersome, I do not think it will be difficult, so long as the proper preparation is made before the Act is launched and put in force. If we have a Chief Electoral Officer who understands his business, and who devotes a reasonable amount of time to the performance of his duties, there should be little or no difficulty in the administration of this Act. It will, of course, require some competent man to effect the organization because there will be a certain amount of organization wanted to gather information as to whether certain places are cities, towns or villages or rural divisions, also in regard to the payment of officials, and to exercise proper control of officials during an election. For that purpose we want a competent man. I have given this matter a great deal of consideration, I have heard many representations in regard to it, and I have come to the conclusion that our wisest and safest course is to adopt in principle the clause in the Bill as originally framed, though, as I say, there will be some minor amendments that I have to propose as the matter is considered.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think we would all agree that it is desirable to have a general principle that would apply throughout Canada. Any difference there may be between the two sides will be as to what is the best principle. I understand the principle my hon. friend is laying down is that we shall have our lists pre-



pared by enumerators, adopting the system of enumerators throughout Canada in the preparation of voters' lists except where there are lists already in existence in which the public have confidence, and which could be used without additional cost in the preparation. I may say frankly to my hon. friend that I think nothing has created such distrust in the electoral machinery of the Government as the adoption of the system of enumeration under the War Time Elections Act. It was the most objectionable piece of legislation we have ever had in Canada and that particular feature of it was the most objectionable feature in the whole of that legislation. For the Government to propose now to make that the outstanding feature of this electoral machinery is going to create, it seems to me, thorough dissatisfaction and complete want of confidence in the purpose of the Government respecting this Bill. It may be that my hon. friend is prepared to give an interpretation as to what he means by provincial lists that may perhaps remove some of the objections that are in our minds to the proposal that he is now making. When he spoke at an earlier stage, in the debate on this Bill, I asked in regard to the Ontario lists-in view of the new law that has been framed in Ontario-whether those lists if prepared during the course of the present year would be regarded as the provincial lists for Ontario within the meaning of this Bill. I think my hon. friend is on record in Hansard as answering in the affirmative. Well, if my hon. friend adheres to that interpretation I see no objection to what he is now proposing; but at a subsequent stage of the debate I think he rather departed-


Hugh Guthrie: I understood that
Bill did not pass the Ontario House.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It has passed.


James Hamilton Ross: Yes, it has passed.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The Bill is
now law.


Hugh Guthrie: My hon. friend from
Middlesex ought to know. Has he got a copy of the Bill as passed?
'Mr. ROSS: Yes, I have a copy of the Bill as it passed its third reading, in my room.


Hugh Guthrie: I only got my information unofficially. I was told that the Bill was put off until next eession.


James Hamilton Ross: I understand that the Bill
received its third reading.


Hugh Guthrie: Will you get a copy of it before we close the debate?


James Hamilton Ross: Yes, I will get it for you.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I will make
my point clear by way-of illustration. Assuming that the Ontario Bill is passed and is law to-day the lists will have to be prepared every year for the different municipalities. Those lists will be prepared by officers under the electoral machinery provided in that Act. Lists will be available for municipal and also for provincial purposes, and these are lists that the public generally in the province will have confidence in. Now what we suggest is that the Government take those existing lists so prepared, as the basis for the federal list. If names are on that should not be on they will be struck off. If others have been omitted which should be on, they can be placed on the lists under the machinery that we have here; but if we duplicate the cost of the preparation of the lists for the whole of the province of Ontario at a time when we are trying to economize in the matter of the expenditure of public funds, we will do a thing which in itself will create a lack of confidence in the machinery of elections. If you take what is already in existence you thereby give (bona fides to your legislation and you have a list which every one has confidence in.


Ernest D'Israeli Smith: Whom would my hon. friend wipe off and put on the list?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That work
would be done by the officers appointed by this Government. That is the point that I would like to make perfectly clear to my hon. friend.


Hugh Guthrie: There is not very much difference between us on this.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It comes to
very little if it is a matter of interpretation.	.


Hugh Guthrie: Because if that is the
provincial list it is adopted as the list by this very section, and you have the right under this section to add to or strike off. There is not very much between us in regard to Ontario but I understood that the list in question was not a provincial list, and I do not think we will go the length of saying that we will adopt a municipal list.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As I said to my hon. friend it comes down very much to a matter of interpretation. If my hon. friend is prepared to take the list that is prepared by the Provincial Government in

accordance with the machinery which they have provided-[DOT]


Hugh Guthrie: With power to add to
or take from.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: With power to add to or take from-
'Mr. GUTiHRIE:	Under the .machinery
provided by this Bill?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Under the
machinery provided by this Bill-that will be perfectly acceptable to us.


Hugh Guthrie: Do you not think that is what the Bill means now?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I did think
so until I heard my hon. .friend, at a previous stage of the debate, give a different interpretation of the Bill. For example, I put a .concrete question: Assuming that an .election were to take place next fall. Then under this Bill as it at present stands the system of enumeration would apply generally throughout Ontario; the new lists would have to be prepared under it.


Hugh Guthrie: If the Ontario list was more than one year old.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Assuming that it was not more than a year old, and will not be until after November. If the election took place before November then we would have to use the lists that were used for the last provincial election, to be added to or taken from by virtue of the provisions of this Bill.


Hugh Guthrie: That is right.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Assume however the elections take place in the month of December would we then use the lists that would be prepared now under the Ontario Government's machinery-whatever provincial lists "they would use if they were to have an election next year?
Mr. 'GUTHRIE.:	If they are provincial
lists my answer is "Yes, as a basis."


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Then the difference between us on a point that needs clearing up is this: Is my hon. friend prepared to accept, as an interpretation of the provincial lists, the lists that are prepared in accordance with the machinery set forth in the Ontario Act which have been completed, which are available, which can be obtained at any time, but which may not have been used in an election?


Hugh Guthrie: It is not necessary that they should have been used in an election. If thy are the proper provincial lists upon 246*
which an election could be held, I am willing to accept them as the basis in Ontario or in any other province; but I insist- on the right to take from or add to those lists in accordance with section 32.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: We on this
side of the House will not take the slightest exception to the minister adding to or taking from any provincial lists. Let us be perfectly clear on that. All we are asking is that where the provincial lists exist they shall be used as a basis, and that using them as a basis the Government shall have power to take from or add to them under the provisions of this Act. We want to avoid duplication of these lists. .


Hugh Guthrie: I would like to make it clear that the voters' lists we are speaking of are the provincial voters' lists, I was surprised a few days ago to hear that the Ontario Legislature had not passed their Franchise Bill.


James Hamilton Ross: I wrote the provincial
authorities for a copy of the Bill as it passed the third reading, but the copy sent me does not show whether it passed or not, I understood from the press that it had passed the third reading and was now the law of the province.


Hugh Guthrie: I think it is worth while to find out whether it was passed. The man who informed we should have known, and I was surprised when he said that it had been allowed to go over until next -session.
Mr. EULER.- If there should be two provincial lists, neither of which is two years old, the latest one is to be taken?


Hugh Guthrie: That is what the Act
provides.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Am I right in assuming that this is what the minister is agreeable to? That the provincial lists to be accepted as the basis for federal elections are to be those prepared within two years of the date of the federal election in all provinces having such lists, the latest revision being used,


Hugh Guthrie: That is the exact provision of section 32.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Then the only point so far as the province of Ontario is concerned is the interpretation of the words "provincial lists."


Hugh Guthrie: If these are provincial
lists, I will accept them, as that is the principle of the Bill.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As I understand, in Ontario these lists 'are made up every year, but if my hon. friend applies to "provincial lists" the interpretation that only those are provincial lists that have been already used in a provincial election, it would mean that in Ontario no provincial lists would be available for ihe purposes of this Act for another four years, and unnecessary duplication would result.


Hugh Guthrie: We can look at the
language of the .section:
For the purposes of any Dominion election held within the limits of a province, the voters' lists shall, except as hereinafter provided, he those prepared and completed for the several polling divisions, under the laws of that
We make that two years.
-immediately preceding the issue of the writ for such election, and which were, under such laws, in force, or had been last in force, for the purposes of provincial elections.
As long as they were in force for the purpose of provincial elections those lists 'would govern. It does not say they would have to have been used or voted on; so long as they are the legal lists for a provincial election, the last of them is binding on us as the basis of this Act. That would apply not only to Ontario but to every other province, and I am quite prepared to abide by that principle. Then, of course, the House understands that there is machinery for taking from or ading to those lists.


James Hamilton Ross: As the Act remains now lists used in Ontario in 1919 would be in force for two years from that time.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think your
other lists can be prepared yet. The 1919 lists will be in force until next November.


James Hamilton Ross: Then you are taking them as the basis of your lists in Ontario, and your registrars proceed to add to or strike off names from those lists. Even if the Bill has been passed in Ontario-and I think it has-the question arises, as my hon. leader has said, what are provincial lists? I do not think that the lists under the Act in Ontario will every year become provincial lists in the sense of section 32, because under the Ontario law, as submitted in the first place anyway, the municipal lists are taken as the basis of the provincial lists, but they do not become the provincial lists for the purpose of provincial elections until after they have 'been revised by a board of revisers, and that is only in case of a dissolution or a vacancy caused by death, and so on.
tMr. Guthrie.]


Hugh Guthrie: I would prefer to revise them under the provisions of this law, of course.


James Hamilton Ross: But does my hon. friend intend to take the lists as prepared under the Ontario Act if passed by the assessor, then by the Court of Revision of the municipality of the rural district, and then by the judge? Those would really be the provincial lists under the old law, because if there was no revision beyond that they used the lists which were in force sixty days from nomination day without further revision.


Mr. ARTHURS:: Only in case the lists
have been revised by the judge.


James Hamilton Ross: Exactly.


Mr. PROULX:: I understand that the
Election Act passed by the Ontario Legislature last session provides for the use of the. municipal lists with the addition of names by -way of enumerators. If this Bill provided that the municipal lists used as the basis of the provincial lists could be adopted for Dominion elections, I think that would serve the purpose.


Hugh Guthrie: If we can see the Act and ascertain what the Ontario Legislature did pass perhaps we can form some idea. I confess that I have not a very good idea of what they did pass. I do not want to be bound by municipal lists. We propose by this section to be bound by provincial lists. If those are in fact provincial voters' lists we are bound by them; if they are not, we do not propose to be bound by them. That i& the distinction. I made some inquiries-not very definite, perhaps -of a man who should know, and he told me that the Bill went over to next session, and I read something in the newspapers to the same effect. But I am informed that an Act was passed dealing with municipal elections.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think we
may take it for granted that if the Ontario Government has not passed the Bill referred to we shall have to accept the machinery that the Government may provide in this Act, but the question -would come up the minute the Provincial Legislature passed the Bill next session. The point my hon. friend from .Middlesex (Mr. Ross) has just brought out is that under the Ontario Act in any event when it is finally passed the lists which will be the basis there for the provincial .elections, will be lists made up by assessors of the various organized

districts-they will not be made up by nominees of the Government. Those lists will be made up every year, but once in four years they will be further revised for the purpose of a provincial election. Is my hon. friend prepared to take the lists that are made up each year by the assessors, and which are the basis of the Ontario provincial lists, and give to them the interpretation of Ontario provincial lists for the purpose of this Act? If he will, that is quite satisfactory to us, because it meets the point we are concerned about, namely, avoiding, if possible, the preparation of two sets of lists, and saving the expense which such preparation would involve. But if my hon. friend is going to put a narrow construction upon what is meant by provincial lists, and say that notwithstanding these lists are made up each year to be available for any election, he will give to the designation of "provincial lists" only when they have been revised by judges under a board established under the Act, for the purpose of provincial elections, that restricted interpretation of course would make those lists of no avail one way or the other. I tis just a question of whether my hon. friend places a broad or a narrow interpretation upon the words "provincial lists."


Hugh Guthrie: I would not like to confine myself to' provincial lists until I know what they are. Heretofore provincial lists were not at all adapted to Parliamentary purposes; they did not contain the names. We have had all kinds of machinery for adding names to provincial lists. II have been informed that undeT the new Act a new system has been adopted to some extent ; for instance, the names of women and of other people are included which formerly were not -included. Really -all the municipalities have to do for their own purposes is to get -from the assessment rolls the names of the municipal electors. I do not know bow far they will exert themselves to make what you might call a reasonably complete list of Parliamentary voters, men and women. If the list was for provincial purposes I know that -there would be an effort to make it complete, but there would not be the same reason for the municipal officer getting -that complete list. I have had some experience as a lawyer mixed up in municipal affairs. In township after -township where the added names of manhood suffrage voters are from five to ten, the Court of Revision sits and brings the number up to forty or fifty. They -are very
careful to get the taxpayers; there are very few mistakes in that regard.
Mr. PARDEE-: If, as the minister says, there is a desire to get on the provincial lists all the names possible, and if you take that provincial list as a basis, are you not as well served as the province?


Hugh Guthrie: I will take a provincial list because I know that it includes names which are not on the municipal lists. Up to this year the provincial lists did not contain the names of those who' Wjere not assessed, except where they have the manhood franchise voters, ll have never had a chance of examining -the new system; I do not know, as a niatttrr ui fact, what the municipal lists are at this date. The new municipal lists in my riding will not be published until September, October, or November. If these lists are provincial lists for the purpose of provincial elections we are bound under this section to adopt them as a basis. We have to-day the voters' list of Ontario which was voted upon last October. Until the 1st of November, approximately, that will be the basis of ia new federal list. After that, unless there is a provincial list of voters in Ontario, we would have to make a new list.
-Mr. CRERAR: That list would be good for two years, would it not, if you were going to make the change?


Hugh Guthrie: If we were making the change the old list would do for another year- a year from next November. >1 do not think anybody is wedded to that former list; they say that there were a tremendous number of omissions. I have not had much experience in connection with it, but I have heard a great many complaints. However, there it is; it will be the basis until a year from next November. If in the meantime the Government of Ontario sees fit, I do not care how, to adopt a new provincial list, then that will be the list, not the old one. I do not see how anything could be fairer. If they do have one, we adopt it; if they do not have one, we have to make one.
Mr. -SINCLAIR (Guysborough): I think it is absolutely necessary to define what is meant by a provincial list; otherwise the meaning of this section will not be clear. For example, in Nova Scotia -there is no provincial list in the sense -that the province make the list. The Government of Nova Scotia do not make any lie-t; they adopt the list made by the municipalities and by the cities. The towns and cities ap-

point revising boards; in the municipalities the municipal councils appoint boards to revise the lists. These lists are completed yearly on the fifth of April, and when so completed are the electoral lists for provincial elections as well as for town and municipal elections. Would the minister regard such a list as a provincial list?


Hugh Guthrie: A list used in Nova Scotia for a provincial election is the provincial list specified in this Bill, and no other.


John Howard Sinclair: Notwithstanding the fact that it is not made by the province?
, Mr. GUTHRIE: If it is declared by the Provincial legislature to be the provincial voters' list and is adopted as such, it is the provincial list ifor the purposes of this Bill, I do not care who makes it. Now, with regard to the Ontario lists, it has been pointed out to me that this year no assessment has been made land no voters' list prepared in accordance with the Act.
, Mr. ROSS: There would be two years from now.


Hugh Guthrie: The assessors and those who make up the rolls and lists in Ontario will not operate this year under the law ' that was passed this session by the Ontario legislature. They will not commence to make lthe.se lists until next spring and the lists will not be finally revised until well on in November or December oif 1921. I do not think we should legislate now on a chance of their becoming the provincial voters' lists; they will not even become municipal voters' lists before that time. I think it is far safer to take it for granted that if lan election should come in the near future we have the list that Was used in Ontario last fall, which can be iadded to or taken from and brought up to date. If after two years an election comes and they have in Ontario a provincial voters' lislt, it would be (he basis of any Dominion lists that had to be prepared. In regard to Nova Scotia, I do not think I oan make it plainer that ian.y list which the Legislature of iNova Scotia declares to 'be a provincial voters' list shall ,be the basis of this law, and we may add to it or take 'from it in accordance with the franchise given to the people by this Act.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: What my hon. friend has just said about Ontario will meet us, I think, if I Interpret his remarks aright. He says that so far as this year is concerned, until the end of October we of

necessity use the last provincial list in Ontario. I do not think any one would suggest that we are seeking to meet a situation that may arise this year. Then, he says that if we go on until next year the assessors will have done their work under the Provincial1 Act, assuming 'that the Provincial Act has been passed.


Hugh Guthrie: It has been passed; I have a copy of it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It has been passed; then we have that settled. The assessors then, will start to prepare the Molts under the provisions of 'that Act
, Mr. 'GUTHRIE: Next spring.
. Mr. MACKENZIE KING: Yes. If the minister is agreeable to take these lists once they are completed and to regard them as provincial lists for the purposes of a Federal election, just las the Ontario Government are prepared to take them as the blaisis of the lists .for the purposes of a provincial election, that will be quite satisfactory so far as we are concerned.


Hugh Guthrie: I cannot state that definitely. Between now and another session the Ontario Legislature may change all that, and there will be no provincial list.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I appreciate that.
Mr.'GUTHRIE: The Bill as it stands gives all that my hon. friend desires; but because the Ontario Government has passed a law for the preparation of municipal lists next spring, I am not going to bind myself down to taking those municipal lists next spring. Next session the Ontario Legislature may declare a new franchise and new lists may be prepared. I am going to take their decision as to what are provincial lists and what are not. If we change this to two years from next November, we would be bound to accept the list of last fall in the province of Ontario. As the matter stands now, if the Ontario 'Government in the meantime has a list which is their provincial voters' list, we are bound to take that, and the same is true of every other province in the country.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: 
Hugh Guthrie: I cannot recognize as a provincial list any list which the legislature of the province does not recognize. I am going to be bound by what the legislature does in respect of its list. Any list which the legislature authorizes as the list of its province, I am going to accept, and I am not going to make an exception for any individual province.


James Hamilton Ross: I have in my hand the Ontario Act, as printed before it reached the third reading, and I should like to point out how complete it is and how completely it meets my hon. friend's views as to what a provincial list should he.
Section 86 reads:
In addition to the particulars required by the Assessment Act, to be entered upon the assessment roll, every assessor shall enter upon the roll the name of every person who is of the full age of twenty-one years, a British subject, and who has been a resident of Ontario for a period of nine months

And so on.


Hugh Guthrie: My hon. friend will see that that will not do-nine months is different from our qualification.


James Hamilton Ross: I think that has been changed to twelve. This is not the Bill as it passed the third .reading, but I saw in the newspapers some reference to this qualification being changed to twelve months, so that there will be no difference. Section 88 reads:
The list so prepared shall be subject to revision by the judge of the county court and shall ibe dealt with in all respects ini the manner provided by the Ontario Voters' lasts Act.
That would be exactly the old list under which we had voted in provincial or federal elections. That list would be prepared by the assessors and revised by the judge, and provision is made in the new Act for exactly the same thing being done. That would be the list used for this Parliament if this new Act had not passed. But the new Ontario law goes further and says that after that is done, in case of a general election, a resignation or a death, there shall be a Board of Revision appointed, just like the amendment suggested by my hon. friend
to clause 32. Those lists would really be as perfect lists as one could possibly get. The last election cost in Ontario over $500,000, and under the new scale of #ees the cost would run up to $1,000,000. If my hon. friend's scheme as suggested on May 17 was carried out, all that expense would be saved, and a far simpler and a fairer method of preparing lists for the Dominion would be enacted.


Hugh Guthrie: As regards that, I think we are so near an agreement that we had better adopt the clause. I do not see that there is anything between us. If this be the provincial voters' list-and I assume, from what my hon. friend says, that it is
__wg are bound, by it. If it be not, ws ore
not bound by it. I am not going to be bound in Ontario by one thing that T am not bound by in the other provinces.


James Hamilton Ross: Technically, it might not become a provincial list until after the revision.


Hugh Guthrie: Then, if it be not a provincial list we are not bound by it, and I cannot adopt it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend must surely see that the effect of the position he is now taking is simply to leave the whole matter in doubt, and that is the worst thing that could happen.


Hugh Guthrie: I will make it
as plain 'as plain can be, that no list shall be adopted. as a basis unless it 1 be a provincial voters1' 1 list less than two years old; but I am certainly not going to have for Ontario a law that allows a municipal list when such lists are not allowed in the other provinces. I do not think in principle there is anything between us as regards what any hon. friend (Mr. Ross) has said. Undoubtedly, in my judgment, this list will be the Ontario voters' list; but, at this moment, I cannot say that it is. The list has not been prepared and, as a matter of fact, nothing has been done under the Act I am satisfied that this iwill be adopted by the province of Ontario as their system and their list, but I am not going to adopt the list until it is adopted by them.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: We on this
side are anxious to facilitate the work of this Parliament and to avoid divisions if possible; but most certainly we are not going to let the electoral machinery of this country be left in a state of doubt if it be

possible to avoid that. If the minister says that there is only a difference of attitude or something of that kind between us, it should be very easy to make the position perfectly plain and beyond all doubt. We ought to realize that what we are now engaged upon is, perhaps, the most serious part of the work of this session, but it has been left to the very last minute to be taken up. I would direct the attention of the 'Government to the fact that they have allowed practically the whole session to pass without this Franchise Act being completed; notwithstanding I said at the beginning of the session, we hoped that the Government would bring down their legislation so as to give ample time for discussion and consideration). But now when we are seeking to get through at the very end of the session, this clause, which is the mo t in-portant of all the clauses of the Bill, has been left, apparently to be driven through by a number of hon. members calling out "carried, carried." The clause is not going to be carried in that fashion without a very strong protest and all the effort the Opposition can put forward to prevent it. My hon. friend, if he wishes, in committee now, to take a reasonable attitude and deal with hon. .members on this side as members of Parliament should be dealt with, can expect to get his' clause through with very little discussion if we , are as near together as he says we are. But if he is unwilling to do that, if he is simply going to 6 p.m. say: "I will not do this; I will not do that; I will not place any interpretation here or there," he may expect to find this House divided very sharply on this all-important question, and I think he will find that the people in the country are distinctly in sympathy with members of the House who are trying to get a fair, honourable and straightforward Election Act.


Mr. ARMSTRONG (Lambton East):: Would my hon. friend be good enough to place before the committee an amendment to the clause along the lines that he has suggested?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am seeking to avoid an amendment; I am trying to get an agreement. We are in committee at the present time; and if the committee can agree, I think my hon. friend would agree with me in saying that greater confidence will be established throughout the country in the electoral machinery than if we have to divide on this particular Bill. I am seeking to avoid a division by asking each [Mr Mackenzie King.]
side to be reasonable; but if hon. gentlemen opposite are unwilling to place an interpretation that is fair and that can readily be given, if there are no bona fides in the whole transaction-


Hugh Guthrie: What interpretation does my hon. friend suggest? Let us get down to facts.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There are
three stages mentioned in the Ontario Act for the preparation of lists. The first is that the assessors make up the lists of the municipalities. The second is that those lists are revised by a judge who constitutes a court of revision. That process is gone through every year. The third is that revision is again made by a Bord of Revision before an election. If my hon. friends opposite are prepared to say that when that, revision has been made by a Conrt of Revision, those are provincial lists for the province of Ontario, we have nothing further to say and we shall agree with them absolutely at that point.


Hugh Guthrie: But they are not provincial lists.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Then, why
does my hon. friend pretend-
Mr. GUTHRIE,: The fact is that they are not provincial lists; they are municipal lists.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Will my hon. friend tell me when they become provincial lists?


Hugh Guthrie: When they are declared so by the legislature of Ontario. My hon. friend, I think, is most unreasonable. He wants me to say that .a certain list is a provincial list when it is not. That is what he is asking me Ito do; whereas, what he ought to ask me .to do, if he is honest in his request, is to adopt the provincial list of Ontario. We have had this Bill before Parliament for months; it has been in com-milttee time and again; and we have had the fullest opportunity for discussion. We have had private interviews and formal conferences; this Bill has been pretty well threshed out line by line; and no one can say .that anybody is trying to force ilt through. The fullest and freest opportunity has been given for debate and discussion and the most careful consideration, .and we have come to the point now where my hon. friend asks me Ito make a declaration that is not true in order to pass my Bill, to say that this is a provincial list when the law says

it is not. If the Ontario Government says it is a provincial lislfc I am bound by that and I do the same in regard to every other province.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon.
friend says that we have had ample Itime for discussion, but he knows as well as every other hon. member knows that this section, which is the most contentious, we have ndt discussed at all. .


Hugh Guthrie: We will see that there
is ample time now for discussion; you will have the fullest opportunity.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: And we will take care to have it. I want Ito make perfectly plain this fact, that so far as names or designations are concerned, we do not care a rap what you call a provincial listt. But this is the principle we stand for: that if it is possible in the province of Ontario and other provinces to avoid Ithe expense of making duplicate election lists and appointing an army of enumerators running into thousands-


Hugh Guthrie: Now you are adding to it. Y.ou offered a moment ago Ithat if I would declare your lists to be provincial lists you would accept the clause. Now you are introducing an army of enumeraltors.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would point out that my hon. friend is unwilling to accept as a basis lists that are already pie-pared, whereas, if he adopted those lists, we would have no army of enumerators.


Hugh Guthrie: I would have to have
the enumerators just the same.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If my hon.
friend takes the lists prepared by the assessors of Ontario for every municipality, lists that have been revised by courts of revision and that are now printed-


Hugh Guthrie: That would only be a
basis; nothing more.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If he takes
those lists as a basis for federal purposes, does he mean to say that he will not save thousands of dollars?


Hugh Guthrie: I would have to appoint the enumerators under this clause just the same.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Why, they
would not have the work to do. They would take those lists as a basis and either add to or subtract from them as the case might be. But my hon. friend will' not adopt the method I advocate.


Hugh Guthrie: I cannot take the municipal list as a basis; I am free to say that.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Let us, then, understand each other. My hon. friend, although he talks about provincial lists, does not intend to take, as a basis for federal purposes, lists which are prepared by the assessors of the different municipalities and revised by the courts of revision and which are available in printed form year by year irrespective of any election. We say that he should accept those lists for three reasons. In the first place, the list are prepared, not by partisans but by regular officers of the municipality, in whom the electors have confidence. Secondly, all the work has already been done, and duplication, which is wholly unnecessary, could be avoided by their adoption; and, in the third place, power is left with the Government, if these lists are not complete, to add or take from them.


Mr. LALOR:: Who would do it?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: it will involve the Dominion in expenses running into millions of dollars which should be saved at this time. More than that, lists prepared in that way will create a lack of confidence in the results of any election that may take place under them and will add to the unrest that exists in this country in matters appertaining to Government and the authority of Government. What we on this side are trying to do is to restore in the public mind confidence in our parliamentary institutions; for that is the chief essential in Canada today. It is needed above everything else, not only here but elsewhere. Nothing is more necessary in the world to-day than confidence in government. Parliamentary institutions have been shaken to their very foundations through the war; and it has been by means of such machinery ias the War-time Elections Act that the confidence of the people in this Parliament has been undermined. We now say to the Government: You have an opportunity to-day to restore public confidence in our parliamentary institutions, and you can do much if you will be honest and straightforward and give to the public lists which they can see for themselves are fair and just, lists that avoid duplication and create no shadow of mistrust one way or the other. That is why we at this time stand strongly on this question, and say to hon. gentlemen opposite, as forcibly as we can, that they owe it to the country to see that no step is avoided to-day which will help tp restore the confidence of the people in their political institutions. 'If the people have not confidence in Parliament and in the representatives whom they send to Parliament; if they are led to believe that representatives returned here come in by means of some fradulent machinery operated by creatures of the Government, who have prepared lists that will send certain representatives to this House, you are -imply paying the way to an unrest such as has not been known in years past. The people are dissatisfied with this Government and with Parlianent. They want a new Parliament; but they want a new Parliament chosen under lists which they believe to be fair and just and right. And I say again to my hon. friend that he has an opportunity to-day to restore the confidence of the people in our parliamentary institutions. If he does not take steps to do SO' he will have not only to shoulder responsibility for neglect when he faces the people at the polls, but also re-
sponsibility for all kinds of possible evil consequences.


Mr. BURNHAM:: Do I understand that the leader of the Opposition, whilst having no confidence in this Parliament and particularly in those who sit on this side, has perfect confidence in the assessors and in the municipal lists? He has perfect confidence in the court of revision; he has perfect confidence in the assessors; he has perfect confidence in the Provincial Government-it is only this Parliament that is perfectly rotten.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Let me make my position perfectly plain. I want to show piy hon. friend that neither he nor I need have confidence in the municipal lists or in the provincial government, for the reason that we are reserving to this Government the right to revise all these lists. All we ask them to do is to take-'those lists as a basis for federal purposes. They are there in Mack and white, and if a man saw his name on 'the list he iwould know he was going to have a right to vote. He will not know the interpretation that my hon. friend is placing upon matters. The elector may think that as his nqme is on the provincial list it is not necessary to put it on any other list. But my hon. friend says no, we are going to have our own appointees to prepare the lists and the name of any man already on the list may be left off. As long .as you have the right to revise the list [DOT]what possible argument oan be offered against accepting the provincial list as a basis?


John Hampden Burnham: 
Mr. CALDER:: I am afraid we are working at cross purposes. I'f I follow the leader oif the Opposition in bis argument, I understand his position to be that if we accept the municipal lists Of Ontario ae the basis for revision he will he satisfied. That is just what it means. IHow is that revision to take place; who its to doi the revising in so far as 'the rural districts lare concerned? Does the hon. gentleman mean that he is quite prepared to aeoept Ithe principal that the registrars or enumerators should be appointed for rural polls and these registrars should take these municipal ltotls as the basis of the new lists which are to be made? Does be mean' then that these lists must

be laiacepted and that they can only be altered toy having application made to add names to them or to have names struck off? Is that what the hon. gentleman means?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I mean that (these lists are to be taken ias the basis. If they are not correct then revision (should be made in accordance .with tihe provisions that are set forth in this Bill. The Bill provides Ifor icourts df revision in urban centres. It provides for judges who are not officers named Iby the Government but who are recognized by the community .as apart from politics.


James Alexander Calder: If I understand the hon. gentleman he is opposed to the appointment of any regis'tlrars or enumerators in so far as the rural polls in Ontario are concerned?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Certainly I am opposed to the appointment of enumerators or registrars wherever it iis possible to avoid dt. The Government has the machinery which Iwill enable dt to get rid of this dlass of special officer for the purpose of preparing electoral lislts. If they will accept the class of public official in whom itthe public have confidence for the purpose o>f revision I have no objection to any fair revision that is Carried out with officers of that class.
Mr. CALiDER: That system is not applicable to rural districts.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It might be made applicable, and if these provincial lists are to be used as the basis and are made with that completeness with which they should be made under this Ontario Act there will be no difficulty in adopting that system. We have agreed to allow in rural districts a man whose name is not on the list to appear at the poll and, if he is vouched for by one individual on election day, cast his vote. If that right is given why should there be all the duplication of expense and the vast uncertainty involved in the preparation of a second list? One can only believe that the Government must be actuated by one of two reasons in the stand which it takes in regard to this matter. One is that the Government wants a lot of patronage at election time so as to be able to give men little, petty jobs and cause them to fall into line. The other is that- they wish in some way to confuse the electors so that men who have been put on these provincial lists will think their names are still on, but will find on election day that the provincial list is not used at all and that it is only the list
prepared by the registrar that is to be used as the basis for voting. Anything that is going to create a lack of confidence or a lack of certainty in the mind of the electorate is going to lead to the feeling that Parliament is not truly representative of the will of the people. Anything that the Government can do to establish confidence and to effect economy in the preparation of the voters' lists is most- necessary at this time.


Mr. FORTIER:: I am of the opinion that in so far as it is possible the lists of each province should be adopted as final. They are recognized as fair and just. I am led to this conclusion because of the circumstances in the constituency which I represent. In my opinion the list of each province should be adopted as final for federal purposes and we should get rid of enumerators or registrars. My reason for this proposition is that I recognize the lists of each province as fair and just and that they have been carefully prepared by the proper authority in each province. By adopting these provincial lists we will save great expense and in the end we will have a fair list. TheActing Solicitor General tells us that the Government want to adopt provincial lists as a basis for the federal lists in each constituency. I do not understand what he means by our adopting those lists as a basis; does he want us to believe that these lists will be taken as original lists? Take for example a list that has been prepared in the province of Quebec and on which the names of men only appear as voters. Then I say that if there are 200 names on this list the enumerator or the registrar will be called upon to place on that list at least 100 or 150 names of women. I do not think that in such circumstances that you could possibly take the list prepared in the province of Quebec as a basis for the federal voters' lists. I have been opposed to woman suffrage; I am still opposed to it and I think the public sentiment of the province of Quebec is against it. In the preparation of these federal lists I think we should look to what has already been decided upon by each province in respect to this list and adopt the provincial lists as final.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Would the minister not consider the fact that in the final analysis if this list having your own board or appointees to hear the appeals you would be amply protected? As I understand it, the lists in Nova Scotia are called provincial lists, while the lists in Ontario are called muni-

cipal lists. They are the same thing. It you were to take the provincial lists as they are now, no matter hy what name you call them, and you appoint your own board to revise those lists how can the Government possibly be prejudiced? Would the minister not be saved a lot of trouble by simply accepting those lists? Let them be treated as the lists for federal purposes and let us go on using them. It appears to me that would be the proper thing to do. The minister says we are not very far apart and yet we are. When we come to analyse the matter, it simply means that the whole difference is as between a provincial list and a municipal list; but if upon that municipal list elections are to be held the only difference between us now is the fact that such lists are municipal lists until an election is held upon them. Then they are regarded as provincial lists. Well, in what respect does that matter, because the whole of the necessary process has been gone through to put them in the shape of provincial lists and they are only municipal lists in name only. The sole difference between us appears to be that an election must be held upon them.


Hugh Guthrie: There is more than
that.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Let me suggest to the minister that if he appoints his own board, if he revises those lists-after having been already revised under the Ontario Act- surely he has riveted, and doubly riveted- every advantage he could possibly have, and furthermore he is saving a lot of trouble and expense. He will have the power to add to or subtract from that list; and furthermore, as pointed out by the leader of the Opposition, where an elector has been left off the list one man can now vouch for him and enable him to vote. I cannot see the force of the ministers argument. I cannot see what objection there can be to saying that these lists shall be provincial lists after they have been completed by the municipalities and that they shall then be regarded as Ontario lists.


James Arthurs: Even the Ontario Government itself does not at present accept those lists as provincial lists.


Hugh Guthrie: My hon. friend and I do not view this question from the same angle.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Perhaps not.


Hugh Guthrie: The leader of the Opposition suggested a few minutes ago that

we should allow one man instead of two to do the vouching for a voter and that has been passed. As I understand, the section was put in to safeguard the rights and interests of hon. members opposite, not the interests of hon. gentlemen on this side. The suggestion was that on this side we had the machinery and we had the officials and the provision in question was adopted to guard against any wrong doing on their part. The safeguard was certainly not to protect any interests of hon. gentlemen on this side; it was adopted to protect the interests of hon. gentlemen opposite
Now the point at issue between us at the present time is this:	Before the Ontario Vdters' List Act was brought in at the recent session of the legislature, our Bill was introduced into this House, and certain sections from our Bill were copied into the provincial enactment. We started on the principle that we would adopt the provincial lists and we abide by it. If the Ontario Government have not a provincial list how can we remedy Ithat? And they have not. My hon. friend even says they have not; I am able to take it for granted that they have not. My hon. friend says that in all the either provinces it is all right to adopt the provincial lists, but there is not one in Ontario so therefore in that province we should take the municipal lists. I would ndt be opposed to taking a municipal list if there was such a thing, but there is not, and there will be no municipal lists until a year from next autumn. Those lists will not possibly even be revised until a year from nexlt December.


James Hamilton Ross: The returns are usually in
by the 15th of April.


Hugh Guthrie: They may get some of
them but in some instances the revision does not take place until June, and in others not unltil July or August, and when there is delay the work is thrown over until September or October.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Why does the minister object if the preparation of the lists are going Ito occupy that long?


Hugh Guthrie: In all human probability there would not be a provincial list available for general elections purposes this year if required. I do not want to make exceptions. I do not see why we should declare for the principle of -adopting provincial voters lists for federal purposes and then make an exception because one province, knowing that, says "We -shall not have provincial voters' lists and there-

fore we must prepare our own lislts." Still,
I would have no objection to adopting the list prepared under the Ontario legislation of last session with this provision:	That
in all olther respects we add to or take from them by virtue of the provisions of section 32. Now under section 32 there is no power of revision in rural communities, that power is given only in urban districts. The only power that can add Ito or take from the lists in a rural community is the rural registrar. With the provisions of section 32 remaining intadt in. that respect I would not object Ito taking such voters' lists as are prepared under the Act recently passed by the Ontario Legislature, provided that at any time there are such lists that could be made available here. But honestly I do not know how you are going to define such lislts. When do the first lists that could be available come into force? I am satisfied they do not come into force until [DOT]a year from next autumn which would be 1921. Then if an election were held between 1921 and 1923 those lislts might be used as a basis for federal lists, and if the same power were given, as is given under section 32, to add to or take from them, I would not be opposed to accepting fthat list, but I would not call them municipal lists. It was suggested to me that such a lislt might be called a list which was to be the basis of a provincial list.


James Hamilton Ross: Exactly.


Hugh Guthrie: I would not have any
objection Ito that. But let us be clear on this point. I think I rather misunderstood what my hon. friend said in the first instance. If he now thinks thalt is going to avoid the appointment of rural registrars he is very much mistaken, because the rural registrars are Ithe men who are to add to and take from the lists.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As I said a
moment ago the question of phraseology is quite secondary.


Hugh Guthrie: I would like you to
suggest your phraseology because for the life of me I do not see how you are going to frame ilt.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would be
very glad to make a suggestion. I think if the minister will add just a paragraph to section 32-or he could put it in the interpretation clause if he likes-that "provincial lists" for the province of Ontario shall mean the lists that have been prepared by the assessors and revised by the courts of revision;-that will cover all that I have
in mind on this point. I think that goes as far as my hon. friend considers now that he has a right to go.


Hugh Guthrie: Any language such as my hon. friend has just suggested would hot be of any use at all. We would then find ourselves in the predicament that there would be no lists of that kind available, and then we would have to start at the preparation of the lists de novo.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If the lists are available why is my hon. friend objecting?


Hugh Guthrie: If we are going to accomplish our purpose we must frame a language that will mean something. There must be some particular list in view or we will land nowhere. How would my hon. friend deal with language such as this, which is clear and distinct:
For the purposes of any ^Dominion election held within the limits of a province the voters' lists shall be those prepared and completed for the several polling divisions under the laws of that province within two years immediately preceding the issue of the Writ for such election and which were, under such taws in force, or had been last in force, for the purpose of provincial elections.
Now what change would my hon. friend make?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I should add words to the effect that they shall be deemed to be in force if they have been prepared by the assessors and revised by the courts of revision as set forth in the provincial law. The only point of difference between us, as has often been said from this side, is this: If my hon. friend says that these lists "are in force" only when they have once been used for a provincial election it is perfectly obvious it will be four years before any advantage can be taken of the lists as prepared under the Ontario Act. On the other hand if he does not place that interpretation upon the provision but will take as a basis for the federal lists the lists that have been made up by the assessors and revised by these courts of revision, that meets our point.


Hugh Guthrie: Those lists would not be a basis. Because my hon. friend will see that they are not the provincial voters' lists. . Under the Ontario Act the lists he refers to are not 'provincial voters' lists. They have to be further revised. It ds notorious, it is well understood, that the municipal lists do not include parliamentary voters. It is supposed that the assessor will cover all the voters that he can but he does not exert

himself to do so; the predominant idea with him is to gather a list of 'municipal voters. Those lists do not become provincial lists until they are finally revised for that purpose. What my hon. friend asks me to do is to accept lists which the Ontario Government may regard as a basis for the provincial lists, but they are not in the true sense of the term such lists as would form a basis for a federal voters' list.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Are we going to have municipal lists in the other provinces? I think no exception would be taken in the other provinces.


Hugh Guthrie: I cannot agree to that. The only reason I considered it in this case is because the Ontario Legislature has in its wisdom not seen fit for some purposes to have provincial voters' lists. But if this means throughout Canada that you are going to adopt some other principle, and change the principle of the Bill which we have discussed here for some three or four months, I cannot agree.


Mr.   BOSS@: Would it not be possible for my hon. friend to adopt some such provision in regard to amending these incomplete lists, as was suggested in page 3 of the memorandum. There does not seem to be very much difference between us here. If my hon. friend insists upon the appointment of enumerators all over the province of Ontario, it does not seem to me that we shall be saving expense. If he is willing to take what he says in the assessment roll prepared by the assessor and revised by the municipal court of revision and then by the judge, as under the old Ontario law, and to change the phraseology and take that as the basis of the provincial lists, he will then have complete lists, and he can have them revised as the Ontario Act provides by the board of revision, or if that is unsatisfactory to him he can have them revised in accordance with his own suggestions as extended on Hansard of May 17. If the reviser in a neighbouring urban-


Hugh Guthrie: That was before you threw in the monkey wrench.


James Hamilton Ross: I did not throw in the monkey wrench. My hon. friend said he was willing to receive suggestions, and the suggestion I have just put forward was made by the gentleman whom my hon. friend left in charge of the conference which I attended. Any monkey wrench came from the other side of the House. But that is not the point. If my hon. friend is willing to take what he has just suggested as the basis

of the lists, what is it going to mean? It means having enumerators appointed in every electoral district to the number of fifty or a hundred, to add probably in one polling subdivision two or three names, and in other subdivisions none at all, and he will have to pay them from $50 to $100 apiece. Why cannot he adopt his own suggestion and say that those lists shall be taken and named as he said they might be named and revised by a revioing officer appointed by him in the urban municipalities? He will save a lot of trouble, and the impression will go abroad throughout the country that he is trying to prepare fair and honest lists, and he will accomplish everything he is attempting to do under the Act.


James Arthurs: I do not think the hon. member for Middlesex (Mr. Ross) is attempting to mislead the House, but he knows as well as any hon. member from Ontario that at the present time less than one-half of the electors are on the provincial lists. No women are included except property owners and tax-payers. The Ontario Government repealed part 3 of the municipal owners' lists which did contain a considerable percentage of Dominion voters. At the present time the only ones whose names appear on those lists are the tax-payers of the municipality. The same thing will apply next year in spite of the fact that the Ontario Government has passed a Voters' List Bill. The Act does not apply until December of next year, and in the meantime we will have voters' lists exactly similar to those which we have at the present time. It would be absolutely foolish to attempt to add to those lists fully 50 per cent of the names that should be on them for federal election purposes by having those people go to some urban municipality many miles away. In Northern Ontario it would be absolutely impossible to carry on in that way. The lists prepared years ago in the province of Ontario were very good lists and very little work would be required to complete them, but to amend the present lists is out of the question.	i |


Ernest D'Israeli Smith: The Court of Revision deals with the assessment roll, and the roll is completed and returned to the council, then it is printed and published and appeals can be made to the county judge. No appeals may ever be put in. But no one will pretend to say that the names of all the electors are on that list. Then who is going to put them on? The whole point seems to me to hinge upon this: Who will do that

work? My hon. friends on the other side say it can he done a great deal cheaper as they suggest; I doubt it very much. The leader of the Opposition must surely be mistaken when he states that the election of 1917 was a fraudulent one.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Oh, no.


Ernest D'Israeli Smith: I think I know just as much as he does about thait election, and I throw back tihe insinuation. I say if there ever was a fair vote ilt was in the election of 1917.


Jacques Bureau: The people were not given a chance to poll their votes. It was a robbery. Call it by its name


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: As I understand, the minister says he would be willing under certain circumstances to 'accept 'the municipal lists as the basis. If he did accept those lists- and the municipal lists I 'am speaking of noiw are complete in Bill details, having gone before the Court of Revision judge-the Government would "then only need to appoint one registrar in, each riding to be the final Court of Revision to 'add to or subtract from those lists as made up.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not want it to be understood that I ever said I would accept municipal lists.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: I was not putting woTds in your mouth. 1 said I "understood."


Hugh Guthrie: I aim opposed to municipal lists. But there is this to he said: under the Act which was passed at the last session of the Ontario Legislature, intituled "An Act respecting Elections and the preparation of Provincial Voters' Lists," and the short title of which is, "Thj Election Laws Amendment Act," the lists to be prepaired 'apply to provincial elections. But I do not think we should be asked to accept half-baked lists. There are the lists made by the 'assessors the preparation of which will be started next spring, and they will be revised by (the Court of Revision in the municipality 'and by the county judge; those are your municipal lists. But those are not provincial lists under this Act.


Mr. OOPP:: When do they become provincial lists?


Hugh Guthrie: After they have been further revised 'by the Board of Revisers under this Ontario Act, that is prior to a provincial election; and the revisers have not yet been appointed. Now, my hon. friend from West Middlesex (Mr. Ross) insisted on the same thing during the previous debate. He said, "I want you to accept these municipal lists in Ontario." That makes an exception as -against all the other provinces and changes the principle of our Act. Why should we do it in Ontario? We have at this moment the provincial voters' lists which were vooed on last October, they will be good under this law fbtr two years. We will have to accept them as the basis for the next two years-


Mr. COPP:: Will my hon. friend permit me a question? At the end of two- years when the present election law is superseded, and there is no election in the province of Ontario, have we any lists for that province? I am asking for information.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not know whether we will or not. It depends how they work under this Act, whether they want a provincial election or not. I do not know what the Drury Government intend to do. But if there are no lists, we have to prepare them under section 32; and if there are lists, we have 'to 'adopt them under that section. But in the meantime I cannot see any good ground for saying, "Yon shall take what is not yet prepared, hiit which we hope next year will be prepared, and which will be only municipal lists." Where I met my hon. friend [DOT], and where I though perhaps we were together at one time was this: (that if we accept those lists in future in Ontario-'lists that do not exist now, and which at the end of next year will ibe municipal lists pure and simple- , if we accept those 'as the basis, we know they will not be complete for federal purposes, and they should 'be subject to the revision provided by section 32, which involves the appointment of rural registrars to do thait work. In cities, towns 'and villages we follow the Act exactly.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Do I understand, then, that if we on this side are agreeable to the minister's appointing his own registrars to revise the lists, whatever lists they may be, he will agree to accept as lists, so far as Ontario is concerned, the municipal lists prepared under the Ontario laws.


Hugh Guthrie: I will not call them
municipal lists.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Let me put it in another way. The Ontario law is a law providing lists for electoral purposes. In the operation of that law there are three stages in the preparation of lists so far as the procedure is concerned. There is first the preparation by assessors, then the revision by a court of revision, and finally re-

vision before an election. The Drury Government came into office in 1919; it will continue in office for four years, say until 1923. If my hon. friend regards as provincial lists in Ontario only lists that are made available for an election in Ontario, then the Ontario lists will be of no service so far as a Dominion election is concerned; it will be 1923 before the Ontario lists will have any significance one way or the other.


Hugh Guthrie: That would be about
right, would it not?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It might from the point of view of some hon. gentlemen opposite; I do not think it would from the point of view of the country and its interests. On the other hand, if my hon. friend is prepared to take the lists as prepared by the assessors under this -Provincial Act and revised by courts of revision, that being an annual process, and to regard that annual list as the basis for the purposes of a federal election, being the basis of the provincial lists under the Ontario Act, as I understand' it-if my hon. friend will do that we will meet him on the point of allowing him to choose his own revising officers. That will bring us both together, we on our side conceding that the Government shall appoint its own revising officers and the Government meeting us to the extent of using as a basis for revision the lists as prepared under this Act and revised according to the stages I have mentioned. There is this limitation, however: I think my hon. friend will feel it to be in the public interest that some limit be placed on the number of registrars who shall be required for the purpose of revising these lists. . My hon. friend from Lambton (Mr. Pardee) has suggested that there be one registrar for the revision of lists in each electoral district. That would limit the number and would certainly help to create public confidence.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think my hon. friend has considered the working out of this proposed machinery. One man would not have a chance at all. We tried it in British Columbia last fall. As a rule, when people are required to do a thing within a certain number of days they wait until the last day and the result is that the courts are overcrowded, the people cannot get their applications in and consequently do not get their names on the list. I do not believe that you could get along with less than one man for each rural polling subdivision, assuming, as I assume that there will be from three to four hundred names to the division, including the names of women, of course.

All -these officials will have to be there; whether you work them the whole of the four or the five days is anoter matter. You might cut down the number of days that they shall sit, reducing the expense by half. The Act provides five days; that may be too long; they might do it in two days or in three days at most. But I do not think that you can have less than one to each polling subdivision if you are to have regard at all to the rights and convenience of the people. I am willing to try to frame a clause on the lines suggested by my hon. friend (Mr. Mackenzie King) expressly on the condition that the list that we recognize as a basic list is a provincial list, though only in course of preparation, not finally completed for provincial purposes. But I will not recognize a proposal that involves our accepting municipal lists as a basis, because if that principle is applied to one part of Ganada I do not see why you should not apply it to every part of Canada. I do not think it is a proper principle. I think ,we may frame a clause which will get around the difficulty as respects Ontario, by assuming that at a certain stage these lists are provincial lists, prepared under this provincial Act. But I would insist, for my part, that the whole machinery of section 32 be the machinery employed for the revision; I believe it is the only satisfactory machinery we can get. It is going to cost some money, but I believe it will give us as nearly perfect a voters' list as we have ever had in this country.


John Howard Sinclair: 
Jacques Bureau: In the cities of Montreal, Quebec, Three Rivers, Sherbrooke, St. Hya-cinthe, Hull and Valleyfield, the lists are revised every two years; in rural municipalities in the province of Quebec they are revised every year between September and November. These lists, I understand, are to be taken as a basis. They are to be handed to whatever officer is appointed to deal with them, and to these lists will be added the names of those who should go on, and from them will be struck off the names of those who, it is claimed, are not entitled to vote. But these lists, I understand, shall be the basis?


Hugh Guthrie: When the matter was up before, my hon. friend (Mr. Bureau) stated to me, I think, publicly, the fact that if we made this two years, he saw no objection. We are making it two years, to make it conform.


Jacques Bureau: I was absent when this matter came up and I wanted to make sure.


Mr. EULER:: As regards the Ontario situation, there is very little difference between the view of the minister (Mr. Guthrie) and that of the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Mackenzie King). As I understand the situation, if the Provincial Government has adopted certain lists, those lists shall be accepted by the Dominion for two years.


Hugh Guthrie: As a basis.


William Daum Euler: As a basis. Then, the succeeding years have been the source of difference, the leader of the Opposition contending that for succeeding lists, if there should be a Dominion election, the Ontario lists that may be considered to be lists in course of preparation for provincial elections, lists prepared by the assessors of the municipalities, might be accepted as a basis.


Hugh Guthrie: If they have been revised by the judge.


William Daum Euler: Yes. I understood the minister to say that he is willing to accept those lists with the idea that they are provincial lists in course of preparation. Then, the matter becomes just one of how those lists shall be finally revised. I was going to make this suggestion with a view to save expense, that instead, at that point, of appointing a large number of enumerators, say, one in each polling subdivision, to revise those lists, the provincial idea be adopted of having a Board of Revision for the whole riding. I would just add this in reply to what the minister said. He spoke of the lists prepared by the assessors as "half-baked" lists. I think he will find that those lists will be very complete, for this reason: the minister stated that the assessors are not particularly concerned to put on the list anybody except those who are municipal voters. In the last session of the Ontario Legislature, I think I am right in saying that a law was passed removing the property qualification entirely in municipal elections, and that means that the municipal franchise becomes manhood and womanhood franchise. Therefore, the municipal lists will correspond almost exactly with the provincial voters' lists or the Dominion voters' lists, so that very little revision would be necessary, and I believe a Board of Revision, such as is contemplated under the Ontario Act, would be very suitable for Dominion purposes also. If the minister could accept that suggestion, the whole question might be very well agreed upon.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Would one
registrar for each municipality not be sufficient?


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think that would be sufficient. I do not think he could possibly do the work in the time allotted. Unless we consider that this has been drawn with the idea of making half a dozen periods of time fit in and dovetail, the thing is going to be thrown out of joint. You must have regard to the amount of work that has to be done in a very limited period of time. The very least you can get on with is one



registrar to a polling subdivision. While it may be that in a compact little polling division in some little township one registrar could do mor'e than the work required of him in that subdivision, one hon. member pointed out to me just a moment ago that in the West we may have to get two or three registrars in some subdivisions to do this little bit of work. That is the difficulty.	*


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Would it be possible, as it is now six o'clock, to have an amendment -drafted before eight o'clock?


Hugh Guthrie: As long as it is a provincial list in course of preparation where it has reached the stage where a judge has revised it, but has not been finally revised, because-* the final revision would not take place until just before a provincial election, a provincial list in course of preparation in Ontario might be adopted.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As regards revision by a judge, assuming there were no appeals to a judge, as long as the formalities of the law had been complied with, that section of the Act would then be regarded as having been complied with.


Hugh Guthrie: I should like to see the amendment before I say anything.


Mr. SEXSMITH:: Hundreds of names might still be subject to revision by the judge.
At Six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess.
The committee resumed at Eight o'clock.


Hugh Guthrie: When the committee
rose at six o'clock we were discussing section 32 with special reference to the province of Ontario and the peculiar situation which has arisen in that province by reason of an Act, passed during its last session by the legislature of Ontario, known as the Election Laws Amendment Act. I make this statement so that the committee may understand the situation. That Act provided for the making of voters' lists for both municipal and provincial purposes. By the terms of the Act the list is specifically a provincial voters' list, but I think that a strict reading of the Act shows that there would be no provincial voters' lists prepared and completed unless a provincial election were held. Section 25 of the Act referred to provides:
The list so prepared shall be subject to revision by the judge of the Country Court and shall be dealt with in all respects in the man-

ner provided by The Ontario Voters' Lists Act. and the last list prepared for any municipality and finally revised by the judge shall be the proper list to be used at any election to the Assembly held before another list has been prepared and revised as herein provided, but whenever an election to the Assembly is to be held the lists shall be subject to further revision, as hereinafter provided, as to persons entitled or claiming to be entitled to be entered thereon as qualified to vote at elections to the Assembly and as to persons entered thereon who are not qualified to vote at elections to the Assembly.
The position is this:	We have in Ontario a list of voters for provincial purposes which was used in October last. Under the language of section 32 of the present Bill as we propose to amend it that would be the list for the next two years. It would form the basis of the Dominion list should a Dominion election be held within the next two years. But in the province of Ontario it is not likely that there will be a new provincial list until there is a new provincial election, and we cannot fix a date in regard to that event. It is a contingency. Now, my hon. friend from West Middlesex (Mr. Ross) and the leader of the Opposition propose that we should adopt what are practically municipal lists of the province of Ontario as a basis for Dominion voters' lists. I object to that; if you do it in Ontario you might as well do it in the other provinces. My view is that the Dominion Government should disregard municipal lists and franchises and prepare Dominion lists upon a uniform basis, having general application throughout all provinces. To meet the difficulty I would be prepared to go thus far, namely, that when a general election is called, if there be no provincial voters' lists in Ontario which would be available-of course for two years we shall have it-then, that a list which is in course of preparation as a provincial list, and which has gone so far as to be finally revised by a county judge, should form the basis for Dominion purposes. There would be the same power to revise that list, to add to or subtract from it, as there would be in regard to any other provincial list which was adopted as a basis for Dominion lists under section 32. I make this suggestion only as a compromise, it is to meet the peculiar case of the province of Ontario. But if the principle of this exception is to be extended throughout Canada I will not agree to it; I would far rather have the clause as drawn. If it meets the objections of my hon. friend, the leader of the Opposition, as he voiced them this afternoon, I would be prepared, owing to the peculiar nature of the Ontario

legislation upon this subject, to go as far as I have intimated. There will also be some minor amendments, in addition to this, to correct some clerical errors; and there will have to be some formal amendments to make the section workable.
I would put in a special provision in section 32 as follows:
Provided that in and for the province of Ontario, if there he no provincial voters' lists which have been prepared and completed within two years immediately preceding the issue of the writ, provincial voters' lists in course of preparation under the Elections Laws Amendment Act, 1920 of the said province, which have been finally revised by the county judge under section twenty eight of the said Act, shall be adopted under this section for the said province, but the same shall be subject to all the provisions of this section as to additions thereto and subtractions therefrom as in the case of provincial lists prepared and completed for provincial purposes.
I am not moving this as an amendment now, but I am offering it as a suggestion to see if we can settle our difficulties. If my hon. friends see fit to adopt it I think we can work it out.


Sir SAM HUGHES:: Suppose at the next session of the provincial legislature there should be an amendment to that section of the law to which reference is made, how would it affect the situation?


Hugh Guthrie: It would affect the situation very materially and might necessitate an amendment to meet that new condition.


Samuel Hughes: Why should we have to depend on any authority other than this Parliament for the right to have our own franchise Act?


Hugh Guthrie: I agree that this House should be able to decide upon its own franchise Act, but it is a very difficult problem in a country like this, with nine provinces each having different election laws. It is a task of very great difficulty. Here we have a difficulty and we are trying by a method of compromise to overcome it. 1 think this may be done without interfering with the principle upon which the Bill is framed, and if it is a satisfactory compromise it may get us over some of our difficulties.


Mr. STEELE:: Is there a provision in
the Provincial Voters' List Act for the revision of the municipal lists by the county judge?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes, the ordinary revision takes place every year before the county judge and the lists would be avail-247*
able to the extent that they had been finally revised by the county judge.


Michael Steele: I am afraid that in almost every electoral district, when we come to the Dominion elections, we will find a varied condition; that some municipal lists for a particular year, say, will have been revised before the county judge while others will not have been so revised, necessitating the use of this year's lists in one municipality and last year's list in another municipality as the basis. It will create a great deal of confusion.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think any great confusion will arise on that account. I thought of that. It would merely mean that in the municipalities where they were finally revised they would be the basis while in the municipalities where they were not finally revised they would not be the basis and the enumerator would make the revision.


John Hampden Burnham: It seems to me that logically the system of franchise which a province had created for itself is the system which we ought to adopt for that province. To use a legal phrase, if we adopt the franchise system of the province, that province is estopped from criticising that action on our part. But there was one suggestion which was made, and somewhat dwelt upon by the leader of the Opposition, and that was that in rural subdivisions, or municipalities-subdivisions particularly- if a man finds himself cut off the voters' list when he should be on, he can go into a polling booth, swear that he is entitled to vote, and be allowed to vote. I have as much faith in humanity as probably anybody; I also have some experience, and perhaps I have some common sense; but if anybody thinks that in some townships I know of-they are not in my county-oh, no-that it is perfectly all right to leave an arrangement like that wide open, he has another think coming. What is to prevent people being injected in, say from the West and making false statements?-and people frequently treat it as a joke when it comes to cheating the franchise and the customs. If you have men and women coming in and making these statements, in a close constituency it will turn the election. If you look for them after the deed is done you cannot find them. It is easy. If the vote is to be allowed without any further presumption than that established by the readiness of the party applying to take his oath, the door is wide open for fraud, and certainly in some constituencies and at

some times I know that would be a mild dose of fraud for some people to take. I would sincerely ask the leader of the Opposition to reconsider that idea and to give us something a little more guarded.


Mr. MORPHY:: The minister has stated
that in case the province of Ontario should pass legislation amending their present law it might be inconvenient and would render an amendment to our Act necessary. That being so I would suggest thalt the minister consider the advisability of providing a further amendment somewhat along these lines: Provided further that in case such Provincial Government have passed an amendment to their present franchise law which would render the amendment which the minister now submits inoperative, section 23 stand as it is to-day.


Hugh Guthrie: The amendment, in the way it is drawn, is intended Ito cover that. Just as soon as there is a provincial list prepared and completed for provincial purposes, that is the list. If the Ontario Government should see fit Ito change its law, or should hold an election on that provincial voters' list, the proposed amendment has no force or effect.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: I would like to ask the minister what he meant when he said, in reply to the hon. member for Victoria (Sir Sam Hughes), that if the provincial legislature made an amendment to Itheir present franchise law it would necessitate the further amendment of this section.


Hugh Guthrie: If they amend it so
as to change sedtion 28 in such a way that there would be no revision before a county judge, we would have to amend our Act.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Then let us amend this section to provide that if they do make such an amendment to Itheir Act the present section stands as it is.


Hugh Guthrie: I think it would be
simpler to amend our law later than to amend it nowr.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As I understand the suggestion the minister has made, it meets, to a certain extent, one of the main points we have raised, namely, avoiding duplication and expense in the preparation of lists. As his suggestion reads, the lists which are now prepared and which are the lists used at the last provincial elections Will be the basis of the lists for the next federal election until a period of two years has expired. There may be certain changes to make, certain additions 
to and subtractions from the provincial
lists. Thereafter lists that have been made up, to the extent to which they have been made up and revised before the Court of Revision shall be available for use for federal purposes. So far there is a saving in the expense of the enumeration of a very large number of names, but there is left to the Government the revision of the list by officers appointed by themselves. While the Government does not meet us on the latter point, we preferring to have no enumerators or registrars appointed but to have the revision made by established judicial bodies, nevertheless the proposal does meet us to the extent I have indicated and as such will be welcomed, and I thank my hon. friend for. it.


Jacques Bureau: But the appeal to the
judge remains?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes. Then, if we have got over that point, there are quite a number of other amendments.


Georges Henri Boivin: I understand the minister desires to move this as an amendment.


Hugh Guthrie: Yes.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Assume that
the Ontario law was in effect this year and that the new lists were prepared in the spring of next year and revised by the judge in the summer, would such Ontario lists be used after the revision had been made by the judge?


Hugh Guthrie: It would only be where there are no provincial lists prepared and completed in the two years, which would mean the following year.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: What I would like to say to my hon. friend is, that his . suggestion would be still more agreeable if those lists could be used just as soon as they were ready.


Hugh Guthrie: I could not do that.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would like to put that suggestion on record at any rate.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend line22 of page 14 of the Bill by striking out "one year" and inserting "two years."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend line 33 of page 14 of the Bill by striking out "Schedules A and B respectively," and inserting ''Schedule A."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move this amendment:
In line 9 of page 15 of the Bill strike out "Schedules" and insert "Schedule", and in line 10 strike out "and B" and insert "for urban polling divisions", and also in line 10 after "section" insert "and the returning officer for rural polling divisions, respectively".
The reason for that is this: In the urban polling divisions the registrar is the man to do it, and in the rural polling divisions the returning officer, that is where the voters' lists do not conform.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I now beg leave to
move the following amendment:
In Schedule A on pageg 16 of the Bill strike out rule 1 and insert the following:
"Rule 1.-Immediately after the receipt of the WTit the returning officer shall appoint, hy writing, in Form E one person only to be registrar of voters in each city, town or incorporated village which is wholly or partly contained in the electoral district for which the election is pending and which has a population of over 1,000 or less than 4,000 persons, and one for each additional 4,000 persons, who shall, before acting as such, take the oath in Form F; and the registrars so appointed shall be assigned by the returning officer to such parts or such number of polls as he may deem right and proper."
In the section as drawn there was a discretion, which was indefinite, as to how many registrars would be appointed. In the amendment which I have proposed there is one registrar for a population of from one thousand to four thousand, and an additional registrar for each four thousand persons. I think it is better to .make the provision definite rather than to leave it discretionary.


Mr. FIELDING:: I was not able to be
here this afternoon. Will my hon. friend tell me what conclusion has been reached with respect to the arrangement that was made about the Nova Scotia lists, and to some extent the New Brunswick lists also? We had come to an understanding with the hon. gentleman concerning the Nova Scotia lists. What I desire to know is whether that arrangement is being carried out.


Hugh Guthrie: Well, we came to a tentative understanding I agree; but if my hon. friend was in the House on the 18th and 19th of May, when the discussion on our proposals took place, I think he must have come to the conclusion that we had only agreed to disagree. As I announced this afternoon, under the circumstances we could not go further with the proposal which that conference or committee decided upon, and I have resolved on behalf of the Government to proceed with the Bill as drawn. However, during the course of this afternoon, we have come to some other conclusions in regard to the voters' lists in the province of Ontario, and I assumed that they would probably settle our difficulty- at all events, very largely.


William Stevens Fielding: At the discussion which took place after the conference-


Georges Henri Boivin: The hon. member will pardon me, but will he allow the committee to adopt the amendment to rule, which was proposed a few minutes ago. Shall the amendment carry?


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to. i
William Stevens Fielding: At the discussion that took place after the conference referred to there was no question raised with regard to the Nova Scotia lists. There was some discussion regarding the Ontario lists and municipal lists, but the assent-the agreement if we may call it so-that had been reached at the conference affecting the Nova Scotia lists was not the subject of any dissension later on, and I have,, up to this moment, assumed that that agreement- again I say, if we may call it agreement- was to be carried out. The essential point of difference was this: I had proposed an amendment to the effect that the lists of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick prepared for provincial purposes should be accepted as final. My hon. friend said they could not agree to that, but they would agree to this. That the lists should be accepted as final, subject to two qualifications; first, that in the urban districts the right of appeal to the county judge should remain-to which I had no objection; and second, that as to the other districts it should be agreed that we should grant the right of a man to swear his name on the list on the day of election in the presence of two witnesses, who would certify that he was qualified to vote-to which, although I thought it an unnecessary cog in the machine, I offered no objection. There was no difference of opinion in the end between my hon. friend and myself. All he desired in regard to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick-although I speak particularly of Nova Scotia-I was content to accept, and I am astonished to be told to-day that that agreement is not to be carried out.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not know on what assumption, my hon. friend thought we were binding the House of Commons by our conference. We certainly sought to reach a basis of agreement; that was the

purpose of the conference; and so far as those who were in immediate attendance at the conference are concerned, I think they were all fairly well satisfied with the proposals then made. But when the matter came before the House of Commons I certainly found otherwise. Whether it was in regard particularly to Nova Scotia or to some of the other provinces I do not say at the moment, but I know there was general dissatisfaction, and I have since learned that on this side of the House, particularly in regard to Nova .Scotia, the proposals were not suitable to those gentlemen on this side who sit for constituencies in that province. Under these circumstances I would not ask the House to consider any suggestions of mine as constituting a binding agreement, and I so notified the House this afternoon when I brought the amendments forward. I thought at the time that they offered a fair solution of our troubles, but other people took a different view. The conclusion of the Government was, and is, that under all the circumstances it is better to proceed with the clause as originally drafted.
Mr. FI'BLDING: I quite agree with my hon. friend that neither of us can bind the House of Commons, hut I thought in view of what had occurred at the conference that if he on the one side and I on the other agreed that probably there would be no difficulty in obtaining the assent of the House of Commons. If my hon. friend found any dissent in respect to the treatment of Nova Scotia he did not find it from any discussion that occurred in this House; he must have found it in some other way as to which he has not taken this House into his confidence. The point of difference was that the hon. gentleman in his original proposal desired to appoint a number of so-called enumerators or registrars, who would have the right to put on additional names. I tried to point out to the House, and I think I persuaded the hon. gentleman, that that was a needless waste of public money. I say that the lists of Nova Scotia are fairly and properly made, and if taken as final no harm would be done. But as my hon. friend said we were to have a reference to the county judge in urban districts, I had no objection; and, although I think it is unnecessary to have men coming to the poll on election day with two brother electors and swearing themselves on, I have not objected to it. But I have objected to the power of the Government to appoint an

army of enumerators for the special purpose of putting on names which they could not put on in any other way. I do not want to argue this further, because it is so absolutely monstrous that I am astonished at the attitude of the hon. gentleman.


John Hampden Burnham: May I ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fielding) why he makes that statement? That statement does not apply to the province of Ontario; and is the province of Nova Scotia a great deal worse than the province of Ontario? In the province of Ontario we are accustomed, until a man is proved a rascal, to consider him as an ordinary fair-minded human being. I do not presume to lecture a man ,so much older than I am, but this business af forever casting mud oveir everything before it is proved there is any wrong, is destroying this country. I do not think that a man so great in the annals of this country, and so patriotic, as my hon. friend (Mr. Fielding) should engage in it,, because he of all men has set the rest of this country an extremely bad example in that respect.


William Stevens Fielding: I have not presumed to discuss the lists of Ontario, because I confess that I am not familiar with those lists. It would be a good thing if we could have a uniform system in all parts of Canada in regard to the lists, but inasmuch as different rules prevail in the various provinces, it has been found necessary to vary the provision even under this law. The whole story is a very simple one. We have lists prepared every year in Nova Scotia for provincial elections. They are prepared by no political authority; they are prepared by municipal councils. There is a right of appeal to the sheriff. There has been no evidence to show that that right of appeal has ever been improperly used; in fact, there have been few, if any, appeals. The hon. .minister was willing to have these lists taken .as final, subject to these two conditions: that in the case of the urban districts there should be appeal to the county judge,-as to which I took the ground that while I thought it was unnecessary, still I had no objection to that appeal;-and, second, that if a man was left off the list he ought to have the right to come to the polling station on election day and be allowed to swear himself on again. I said that although I thought it was not necessary I had no objection to that. What I did object to, and what I object to now, and what I am obliged to continue to object to, is the right of the

Government to appoint an army of so-called enumerators or registrars through a partisan returning officer for no other purpose than to make partisan lists, although we were told this to be a fair, a just and a generous Bill.
Amendment to rule 1 agreed to.


Hugh Guthrie: On page 17, Mr. Chairman, some change has to be made. I therefore move to amend Schedule A on page 17 of the Bill by adding at the end of Rule 2 the following words, " and such notice shall be so posted at least four days before the first day of registration."
And also by adding thereafter the following paragraph:
He shall also, before nine o'clock of the first day fixed for the registration of voters, cause at least five copies of such notice to be posted up in some conspicuous place outside of and near to the place where he sits for the registration of voters, and he shall see that these notices remain duly posted up thoughout the whole period of registration.
It is to give the public notice that the registrar is sitting there.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: Then, Mr. Chairman,
I beg to move to amend Rule 3 in Schedule A by adding after the word "registrar" the words "and additional registrar," and by striking from lines 1 and 2, the words "city, town, or incorporated village or part thereof" and inserting in line 1 after the words "within the" the words "territorial limit for which he is appointed."


John Howard Sinclair: I would like to have the section read as amended so that we can understand it. The minister is introducing many amendments and hon. members have no information as Ito what the amendments mean.


Hugh Guthrie: The leader of the Opposition has a copy of these amendments. The section will now read:
Every registrar and additional registrar shall provide within the territorial limit for which he is appointed, a convenient place, properly lighted and heated, and being the place mentioned in such notice ;-
And so on.


John Howard Sinclair: That
means that there will be a registrar in every polling distridt?


Hugh Guthrie: There is power in cases of cities to appoint sufficient registrars for every 4,000 of the population. If the population is from 1,000 to 4,000 there shall be one registrar, and for every additional 4,000
an additional registrar. This imposes on both the registrar and the additional registrar the duty of having these premises property lighted and heated and of giving Ithe proper notice for the holding of the sitting.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have as.-
sumed that it would expedite matters to have the minister bring forward all his amendments and have them passed as read, on the understanding that we would havp a chance to consider the whole section as amended before we>
finally pass on it.


Hugh Guthrie: We can take them all
and then we can have the Chairman read the clauses over. The amendments are all more or less technical; they do not go to the principle or the root of the matter. The other amendments are as follows:
In schedule A, rule 4, paragraph (b), strike out in the fifth and sixth lines the words "and proper polling division." Insert before the word "address" in line 5, the word "and." Strike out in the sixth and seventh lines the words "on the registrar's preliminary, or compilation, list " and insert " in an index book which shall be kept for each polling division in form K6 Ito this Act." In the last two lines of paragraph (b) of rule 4 strike out "on such preliminary list" and insert " in such index book." We are providing that each registrar shall have a proper index book in which the registrations may be enltered as they come in, and Ithat such book shall be alphabetically indexed and convenient of reference. When the Bill was first prepared the use of such a book was not contemplated, but Mr. Castonguay says that it is indispensable Ito have an index book for quick reference, and it is to comply with his suggestion that these amendments are necessary.


[Stage Direction]
Amendments agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: On the last line of page 17, the word "or" before Ithe word "town" should be struck out, and after the word "town" the words "or incorporated village" should be added.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: In schedule A, rule 6,
line 2, strike out "two" and inserlt "three." It is thought that' two days is too short a time within which Ito get these lists out. Then, in paragraph (a), first line, strike out "preliminary or compilation list" and insert "index book." In line 7, paragraph (a), after the words "according to," insert

"the first letter of the surnames.' In line 11 of paragraph (a) strike out "preliminary or compilation list" and insert "index book."
I would suggest an amendment to meet the question raised by my hon. friend (Mr. Denis) this afternoon. At the end of paragraph (a) insert the following words:
The name of a married woman or a widow shall be entered on the index book under the first letter of the surname of her husband or deceased husband, respectively.
In paragraph (b), line 2, add the word "incorporated" before the word "village," and in paragraph (c), second line, after the word "candidates" add the words "upon nomination day."


[Stage Direction]
Amendments agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend
schedule A rule (8) by striking out in the fourth and fifth lines the word "a certified copy of the list prepared by him" and inserting the words "the index book kept by him for each polling division under his *jurisdiction."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: As regards schedule A rule (11), a difficulty arises that, in Nova Scotia, and also I think in New Brunswick, *there are no junior or senior county court judges; there are just county court judges. It has been drawn to my attention that this rule will not suit Nova Scotia nor New Brunswick. I, therefore, move to amend schedule A, rule (11) by inserting after the word "judges" in line 3 the words "where there are both senior and junior county court judges and in other places the county court judges."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I also move to amend schedule A, rule (11) by striking out the word "he" in line 24, and inserting the words "each revising officer." This says: "He shall appoint a clerk." It should read: "Each revising officer shall appoint a clerk."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend schedule A, rule (14), paragraph (d), by striking out in line 8 the word "or" where it first occurs and after the word "town" inserting the words "or incorporated village" to make this read: "city, town or incorporated village." It reads now: "city or town."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
CMr. Guthrie.]
Hugh Guthrie: I also move to amend schedule A, rule (14), paragraph (d), by striking out in line 9 the word "part" and inserting the word "section," and in the last line before the word "such" by inserting the word "any." The paragraph reads: "in this part"; it should read: "in this section." I do not think the insertion of the word "any" before the word "such" in the last line matters much, but the revising officer has asked that it be inserted.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend schedule A, rule (15), paragraph (c), by striking out in line 2 the words "Chief Electoral" and inserting the word "Returning." This reads: "The Chief Electoral Officer." It should be "The Returning Officer."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend schedule A, rule (16), by striking out in the third line the word "making" and inserting the words "and make all," and in line 5 by striking out the word "certifying" and inserting the words "shall certify," and in line 6 by striking out the word "dispatch" and inserting the words "shall dispatch by registered mail." The grammatical construction in the clause as drawn was very incorrect and this is to remedy that defect.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Frederick Forsyth Pardee: In rule 17, I think, if possible at all, the minister should make the time longer than four days prior to an election.


Hugh Guthrie: When we get these changes made, we can read the section and then suggestions or amendments may be made. As regards Rule 17, in the computation of time between the final revision of an urban list, that is, a list for a city, town or village, and the date of handing the list to the candidate, a period of only eight days has been allowed. It has been pointed out that a strike may occur in a printing or newspaper officer or other unavoidable delays may take place and for some reason or another the lists may not be printed within those eight days. The King's Printer pointed out this difficulty, and he suggested this amendment which I will move because I think we should make some provision. It is just to provide for unforeseen accidents or delays. I move that schedule A, rule (17), be amended by adding at the end of the rule the following paragraph:

Provided, however, that if the revising officer shall report to the Chief Electoral Officer that the lists cannot be printed in time for delivery to the candidates as required by this Rule, the Chief Electoral Officer may order that the printing of the lists he dispensed with; and in such case the revising officer shall cause to he made for each candidate one complete copy of the list as finally revised and certified under his hand as a true copy and he shall deliver or send by registered mail to each candidate or to his agent one copy of such list at least four days before the polling day.
Candidates, although they may not have their lists actually certified, printed and complete, will, I think, in every case have lists; but allowing eight days for printing the lists will allow only four clear days before polling day for possession of the printed list. There is no doubt they will have preliminary lists, but they will not have all the corrections. The usual experience, of course, is that candidates are represented on appeals and they will know what changes are made. It would be better if we had longer than four days for printed lists, but allowing every day we can, four days is all we can allow.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: It is very short.


Mr. CALDWELL:: In my election I did not get some of the lists nor a copy of any kind until four days after the election was over.


Hugh Guthrie: That was a great misfortune. We are trying to remedy that.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: 
Hugh Guthrie: These are not the rural
lists.
Mr. 'CALDWELL: What governs the rural lists ?


Hugh Guthrie: The rural list is not
printed at all ; it is delivered fourteen days before-not later than nomination day.


Georges Henri Boivin: I do not want to interrupt this discussion, but I undestand there is an agreement between the Acting Solicitor General and the loader of the Opposition- which will undoubtedly be confirmed by
the unanimous consent of the com-
9	p.m. mittee,-that, instead of discussing
these amendments as we reach them, the minister be allowed to move all these amendments; that they be adopted for the time being, and then that the committee go over the rules as amended, reserving to members of the committee the right to move at that time any further amendments they may deem advisable.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend schedule A rule (20), by striking out in line 2 the word "eight" and inserting the word "six". That is, the voters' lists must be delivered before six o'clock, instead of eight o'clock, on the morning of election day.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I am informed that I missed making an amendment to rule (2). I move to amend schedule A, rule (2) by striking out the word "or" where it first occurs in the third line, and inserting after the word "town" the words "or incorporated village".


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I move the following
amendments:


In Schedule B:: Rule 2. line 9, after word "order" Insert "according to the first letter of their surnames".
Rule 3, line 2, strike out "sign" and insert "certify as in form K7 to this Act; and, line
10	after "notice" insert "as in said form K7."
Rule 5, line 5, strike out "Second":	in
line 6, after "Act" insert "He shall also on the same day deliver or mail by registered letter to the returning officer a copy of the list so certified and the returning officer shall forthwith transmit the same to the Chief Electoral Officer":	and, line 9. strike out
"posted" and Insert "retained": and, line 9, after the word "rules" insert "He shall also deliver or send by registered mail to the returning officer a true copy of such revised and corrected list of voters": and, line 10, strike out "eight" and insert "six".


[Stage Direction]
Amendments agreed to.
The next amendment has reference to section 36 and I do not know whether I should properly move it now, although it has to do with this section more than with section 36. I would move, Mr. Chairman, that for the purpose of this amendment we return to clause 36.
Jean-Joseph Denis: I take it for granted, Mr. Chairman, that the committee will return to clause 32?


Georges Henri Boivin: Yes.


Hugh Guthrie: I move to amend clause 36 by adding as paragraph (d) the following:
(d) A statement setting forth what portion, if any, of the electoral district shall be deemed to be urban polling divisions under the provisions of this Act.


John Howard Sinclair: What
does this mean? We have a definition of what urban and rural polls are. Is this intended to alter the definition in any way?


Hugh Guthrie: No, the definition in
clause 2 governs; but some question may arise as to whether a particular place is incorporated and has over a thousand 'people. The Chief Electoral Officer has absolute right to decide that. He shall decide it, and when he sends instructions to the returning officer shall notify the returning officer as to which places are urban and which are not. He has to be governed by the interpretation in clause 2.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: I now move that we return to the consideration of section 32.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would like
to ask the minister in reference to subsection 12 of section 32 which reads as follows:
In the case of an election other than a general election, the Chief Electoral Officer may, notwithstanding anything in this Act, direct that such lists be wholly prepared for both urban and rural polling divisions pursuant to the provisions of Schedule B to this section, and such lists, when so prepared, shall be the official lists of voters for the election.
Is there any reason why in the case of a by-election the provincial lists should not be used, just as in the case of a general election, to the extent that it is possible to use them?
Mr. GUTHRIE' The draftsman of this Bill thought that was a necessary provision because circumstances might arise where, in the opinion of the Chief Electoral Officer, it .might be more judicious and less expensive if the lists were revised by enumeration instead of registration. The man who drafted the Act thought it would be very useful. It is discretionary with the Chief Electoral Officer whether he shall employ that method or not, but he shall not employ it in the case of a general election.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It leaves the matter in doubt and I think it unwise so to do. He should be obliged to take the

list that exists unless there is some special reason why he should not.


Hugh Guthrie: There is no special reason that I know of except that Mr. O'Connor, who drafted the clause, thought it was a very useful clause to have there. I must say that I have no objection to having it struck out. I think the system of registration is preferable to any other. This merely gives a discretion-in case circumstances might arise where it might be deemed advisable to have the whole thing by enumeration-to the chief election officer to direct in the case of a by-election; but I am not going to insist upon it if the Committee wants it struck out.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am as strongly opposed to the whole system of enumeration as it is possible to be. Unless some other member of the committee sees any wisdom in retaining it I move to strike it out.


Hugh Guthrie: I agree.


Georges Henri Boivin: Mr. King moves to amend clause 32 by striking out subclause 12 thereof.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the clause as amended carry?


John Howard Sinclair: Before
the clause carries, I would point out that provision was made in it for transferring voters from one polling division to another. I would like to understand at what time that transfer can be made. Can it be made after a copy of the list is given to the candidates, or must it be made prior to that time?


Hugh Guthrie: No. I think that has to be done under section 28, an earlier section than this. The polling divisions are arranged under section 28, but it is quite possible that a Dominion polling division and a local polling division may not be co-extensive, and in order to make the provincial polling divisions conform for Dominion purposes some names may have to be transferred from one division to another. That duty so far as the urban divisions are concerned is to be performed by the registrar, and in the rural divisions by the returning officer. It is merely for putting them in an appropriate Dominion polling division. That must certainly be done before the registrar, in the urban case, and the enumerator, in the rural case, certifies and delivers his lists to the returning officer.


Mr. McKENZIE:: I venture to say, Mr. Chairman, that every period of time that

is given in connection with this section for the taking of an election is too short- absolutely too short. In our province the lists are prepared on the 5th day of April each year. The electoral list is an old friend to everybody in our province; they know all about it. Here is a condition brought about where we do not see the electoral list till the morning of the election day. A candidate*is rarely at home in his own place on election day, and the result will be that he will not see the electoral list at all. I submit to you, Mr. Chairman, that this is a most extraordinary piece of machinery. We hear a great deal of the War-time Elections Act as being a black mark on the good life of this country; but let me assure you, Sir, that although fair promises were made at the start in the case of this Bill, yet if it were possible for any thing to be worse than the War-time Elections Act, this Bill can be so characterized. The minister could not take any more to himself than he is doing. He is preparing the list himself, appointing his own officers; everything about it from stem to stern, lock, stock and barrel, is his own creation, without one scintilla of independence in the election from start to finish. That is the kind of election we are going to have when the time comes. The only consolation is that if the Canadian people are aroused, as I hope they will be, to the real situation of this country no machinery of the minister no matter how water-tight it may be will suffice. There will be enough independence in Canada to hurl the minister and his ministry, and everything belonging to him, _ clean over the bank, and get back to a condition where the people can once more breathe freely in this country. Then they will be rid of Unionist Government, and rid of the machinery that the Unionist Government has created. Then we shall once more get back to the state where the people will be able to go up to the polls and freely express their opinion. We have not got that situation to-day; and the minister, the Prime Minister, and every other member of the Government, need not be surprised that there is disorder, dissatisfaction and unrest abroad, and that disbelief in every institution of this country prevails generally. How can it be otherwise when in the hot days of the summer we are sitting down to manufacture such a law as this for the Canadian people-a law manufactured with the hope that the people will have nothing to say about how they shall be governed, or what laws shall be enacted-nothing but the black machinery called into existence by the
minister, something like what I hear is in operation on the adjoining racetrack, a sort of automatic machine. That is the sort of machine we are going to have rather than a fair election, lit is something under which nobody will have anything to say, something that is created by the will of the minister for the ministry and for their own purposes. I would certainly say there is no use putting forth any amending proposition, no use at all. The minister got into a reasonable frame of mind a couple of weeks ago. At any rate he said he was getting reasonable. He declare that he was going to accept our lists in Nova Scotia, that he was going to be equally reasonable in a number of things; but whether he invited the crack of the whip or not he got it and he came down from the tree quicker than any coon in the world ever did. Now he is right back where he was before. He simply told his followers, "Pray, gentlemen, foTgive me. In a moment of weakness I was falling back on something that was less drastic than what you put before me. I will take it all back, and this will go through, if possible, in a form seven times worse than it was before". That is the situation that we have now. Surely there are hon. gentlemen opposite who believe that presenting a man with an electoral list on election day is not a fair proposition. The returning officer does not see it; nobody sees it; nobody knows whose name is on it; and the good, honest man, who sits supporting the Government, says: "No, you will not see the list. We are going to pass it to returning officer at some time before six o'clock in the morning, and you may have the privi-ledge of seeing it some time after the election is over". Hon. gentlemen opposite come from different parts of the country. They pride themselves on their fairness and on their honesty in everything else except an election, but when it comes to an election there is apparently no desire for fair dealing at all. The only satisfaction, Mr. Chairman, is this: I feel confident, as far as my province is concerned, that no machinery the minister can devise can bring him any other result but the one round robin that he will get from that province.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Chairman, if we are not making further amendments to thie clause it is simply because we had a conference this afternoon, when some slight change was agreed to which made the clause a little less objectionable. I would not, however, like the minister or the Government to think that the clause as it

stands is at all acceptable. If it carries, it carries on division.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Before the clause is finally disposed of, I would like to call attention to the fact that the French copy which has been supplied to members does not give any definition in the interpretation clause of the terms "urban polling division" and "rural polling division." I merely rise for the purpose of calling attention to the oversight so that whoever is responsible for it will correct it when the time comes.


Hugh Guthrie: I will see that the
necessary correction is made. These changes were put in very early in the discussion, before the Bill was produced for second reading, and I cannot understand why they were omitted from the French translation.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Guysborouigh):: The
provisions of this clause to my mind settle the partisan character of this measure. In plain language it provides that a partisan returning officer has the power to appoint other partisans in every polling division for the purpose of making the lists. These officers are not selected by judges. They are selected by the Government. The Government wiE select one of their own supporters, and the chances are that they will select a man nominated by the candidate whom they intend to run in the district. That candidate will then submit the names of the registrars in the various districts. So that, as my friend from North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie) says, the whole section from first to last is most unfair and most objectionable. It is worse than the old system of partisan revising barristers which existed from 1885 to 1807. Under that system we had a partisan, it is true, but he was a man of some standing in the community, and he took the responsibility of making the lists. He did not appoint a lot of heelers to make the list; he made it himself and took the full responsibility. That system was found to work very badly indeed, but it is not nearly so bad nor so unfair as the proposed system because we have not one man only to do the work but fifty or sixty men, all off a partisan character, and each doing his own small part of the work in the various districts. The Liberal party made strong objection to the old system which provided for the appointment of revising barristers, and in the platform of the Liberal party in the election of 1896 provision was made for its repeal and a return to something like a 
fair electoral law. The Liberal party carried out their promise and in 1897 the practice was abolished and we returned to what has ever since been recognized as a fair system. The only three occasions in the history of the Dominion on which an attempt has been made to gain a partisan advantage from the election law, were, I am glad to say, made by the party represented by hon. gentlemen opposite. The first attempt was made in 1882 when the Gerrymander Act was passed, which is remembered as one of the darkest blots on the record of the Conservative party; the next attempt was made in 1886, when partisan revising barristers were provided for; and now we have the third attempt. I am glad to -say that the history of the Liberal party is free from any such offence.
The clause retains some very objectionable features, but that is the main one,- that the Government are selecting the jury to try themselves. That is what it comes to. But I wish to warn hon. gentlemen opposite that they will not always be on the Treasury benches. When an opportunity is given to the people to express their views at the polls, this Government, in my opinion, will be defeated, and then hon. gentlemen opposite will have to move over to this side of the House, and they will not always find the Liberal party so magnanimous as they were in 1897. I want to say to hon. gentlemen opposite that they are to-day building up a system that they themselves will have to meet a little later on. I think it is in the Psalms of David where a man is described as digging a pit in which he is himself to fall. My hon. friends are putting up a stone wall to knock their own heads against in future; and they will find that the law they are passing to-day will operate against them so that they may be kept out of power for a very long time. Therefore I do not want to let this opportunity pass without giving them warning.
There is nothing fair about this law. These partisan registrars are not appointed by judges as was proposed, and it would be impossible to make a law that would be more unfair. There is no use discussing this further, for our objections have been placed before the minister over and over again. The old feature that we complained of at the start still continues in this section ;we have tried to remedy it; but it appears that no concession is to be made and that the partisan character of the officers who make the lists is still to be maintained.


Henri Sévérin Béland: I would like to correct
the impression I gave to the committee regarding the Franch translation. The reason for my error is that in the English copy the definition of the rural and urban polling divisions are set out under the letters (v) and (w), while in the French copy they come under letters (c) and (d).
Section 32 agreed to on division.


Hugh Guthrie: :	Since I gave notice
of the amendments, Mr. Chairman, the Assistant Clerk of the Crown has sent me a memorandum stating that I have omitted from paragraph (a) on page 18 the certificate which should go in at about the middle of the paragraph after the word " appointed." I therefore move to amend Rule (6) by inserting after the word "appointed" in line 8 thereof the words:
He shall write and sign at the foot or end thereof the following words:-
" I certify that the foregoing is a correct list
of the voters in polling division No	 (or
Nos	 as the case may be) of the city,
(town or incorporated village) of
in the electoral district of	, as
prepared by me.
"Dated at	this	day of
Registrar.
Schedule A to section 32:
Rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, as amended, agreed to.
On rule 9-Powers of registrars and constables :


William Lyon Mackenzie King: This is pretty arbitrary power to put into the hands of a lot of enumerators, because that is all they are. You are giving them power to appoint constables on the spot, and giving these constables, acting without taking any oath, power to act and forcibly to remove persons. - If these people were men of authority and responsibility, -there might be some wisdom in giving them these extreme powers, but if the class of registrars are to be of the type olf the enumerators who were' appointed under the War-time Elections Act, the less power they have, the better.


Samuel Hughes: 
William Lyon Mackenzie King: 
Samuel Hughes: I have had a great deal of experience of electoral laws, and my experience as that the Election Act of 1886 was the best and fairest for both sides. So long as these enumerators are selected from the honest electorate, I am perfectly content; I have no complaint. The 'trouble has always been in the machine.


John Howard Sinclair: The
peculiar thing about 'this rule is that a constable -may remove a person whether he -is -doing -anything or not. The rule says:
He may also, if necessary, forcibly remove or direct the forcible removal of any person from the place wherein the registration is taking place.
The man may toe quite .peaceable and observing the law; he may be the agent of the_opposite side endeavouring to get f-air play, -and yeit the constable has power under this Clause forcibly to remove him. The Clause does not say 'that the constable is -to remove people wTho -are breaking the l'aiw or disturbing the peace, but it say-s that he is to remove any person. I move -that we strike out the clause.


Hugh Guthrie: What part of it?


John Howard Sinclair: -I move to- amend rule 9 by striking out 'the following words:
He may also, if necessary, forcibly remove or direct the forcible removal of any person from the place wherein the registration is taking place. He and the constables appointed by him shall have power to act without taking any oath.


Hugh Guthrie: I agree.
Amendment, agreed to.
Rules 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, agreed -to.
On rule 15-Delivery and printing of lists:


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Is the time
fixed in this rule as long as it can be made?


Hugh Guthrie: We left just as much
time as we possibly could, allowing eight days to print, and that is crowding it a little. I do not think that in the working out there will be any lack of time. The candidates will have due time.


[Stage Direction]
Rule agreed to.
Rule No. 16 agreed to.
On rule 17-Lists to candidates or their agents four days before polling day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: In connection with this rule there is a point which the minister might consider. A candidate is not likely to be in a given locality on the day of polling, and according to this provision it would be discretionary on the part of the revising officer to send the lists either to the candidate himself or to his agent. If lists came to the candidate from different parts the chances are that no one would see them. Am I right in interpreting the section to mean that if a candidate notified the returning officer that he wished the lists to be sent to his agent, giving the name of the agent, they would go to him?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Rule agreed to.
Rules 18, 19, 20 agreed to.
Schedule A to section 32 agreed to.
On schedule B to section 32.
Rule 1-Registrar of votes for rural polling division:
Hugh Guthrie: Some words are omitted from the present wording. The rule reads:
Whenever a competent person can he secured within the limits of the polling division such person shall he appointed,-
I move to amend the clause to read:
Whenever a competent person can he secured who is a resident-
And so on.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Rule as amended agreed to.
On rule 2-Duties of registrar:
Hugh Guthrie: There is also an omission from this rule. As it stands the rule reads:
Each registrar, after taking oath as such in Form F, shall, whenever the returning office! so directs, complete in manner provided by section 32 of this Act and be these rules, a list of the persons, etc.

I move to add, after the word "rules, ' the following w'ords:
In an index hook in Form K6 to this Act.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Rule as amended agreed to.
On Rule 3-Revision of lists; attendance of registrar:
Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Why should a registrar in the rural district be called upon to be in his place only in the afternoon? In the urban district he has to be there all day, why should he not be in his office in the rural district all day?


Hugh Guthrie: It is considered that in a rural division there will be from 300 to 350 all told, and by being in his office for five or six hours a day he can hear all the complaints. It is thought that this will be a satisfactory time to meet the convenience of all parties. If we are going to have him attend for longer hours, I fancy he will want more money.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: A man in the country would take very much longer to do the work. He is not an expert such as you usually find in a city or town. A man in the country as a rule wilj not be accustomed to this kind of work and he will be much longer at it than the expert city man. I think the time is too short.


Hugh Guthrie: I am told that the experience in Saskatchewan is that as a rule there are not five appeals in any rural division. I think that from five to ten would be probably the limit in the older-settled portions of Ontario. I am satisfied that in the county in which I live every man in a rural division knows every other man, and I do not think'there will be many appeals. There will be some.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I understood this to be for the making of the lists.


Hugh Guthrie: This is after the list is made up. People may object and ask to have the list corrected, and for the purpose of hearing objections and taking the proper action he shall sit for five or six hours a day.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: When does he settle down to prepare the list?


Hugh Guthrie: In most cases he will
have a basic list already prepared, but in certain cases where the provincial lists are over two years old he has to prepare a list and he has to have it prepared and posted up nineteen days before polling day. Then he sits for five days, and he has to have it finally certified and completed not later

than nomination day, "which is fourteen days before polling day.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I understood this rule to apply to the preparation of the lists, and if it does there is no reason -why a man sitting in a country place should not sit just as long hours as the man in the city.


[Stage Direction]
Rule agreed to.
On Rule 4-addition and elimination of names; correction of errors:
John Howard Sinclair: This rule is very objectionable. It enables the registrar to strike a name off the list after the list has been completed and handed to the candidate on nomination day. He can keep the list for five days after nomination, because it may be done any time up to the tenth day before election, and during those five days he can strike the names of opponents from the lists that have been given to the candidates. This section is so objectionable that I should not think the minister would want to retain it. Fifteen days before the election the electoral list is supposed to be completed, and is delivered to the candidate, and that ought to be final. There is no reason why names should be struck from the list after that date. There may be a reason why names omitted should be added, but there certainly cannot be any reason why names should be struck from the list without notice. You will observe that the registrar can, without any notice to the voter, the candidate or any other person, go behind his door in his own house and privately put his pen through the name of a man who has been regularly placed on the list. That is what it means. It puts a power in the hands of the partisan registrar to disfigure the list and change it after it has been settled. I do not think the minister should ask us to pass this section. It was so objectionable that one of his own supporters protested against it a few days ago. I do not think that any fair man should say that the registrar should have the right to do that.


Hugh Guthrie: Does my hon. friend
want it stricken out? I do not attach any importance to it whatever. It was put in for the purpose of correcting clerical errors. If my hon. friend wants to remove it I am quite willing.


John Howard Sinclair: I move to amend Schedule B to section 32 by striking therefrom Rule 4 in its entirety.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On Rule 5-certificate of registrar; delivery of voters' lists:
John Howard Sinclair: il think rule 5 ought to. be re-drafted owing to the elimination of rule 4. Do the rules as amended now read that no change is to be made after the list is delivered to the candidates?
Mr. GUTHiRilE: Yes. After the list is delivered to the candidates on nomination day it is final.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It seems to me that possibly in striking out rule 4 we have gone further than the minister really intended. Rule 3 provides that:
Each registrar shall complete, date at his place of residence and sign such copies of the voters' list on the fifteenth day before the polling day and not otherwise; two of such copies he shall post up in two of the most public and conspicuous places within such polling division and another he shall retain for revision. He shall on the day fixed for the nomination of candidates deliver or send by registered mail to each of the candidates a copy of such list. He shall attach to each of the copies so posted up a written notice signed by him and designating the place within the polling division and a time where and when electors may conveniently find him during the hours between two and six o'clock in the afternoon of every day except Sunday of the five days next following the fourteenth day before the polling day. He shall attend and remain at such designated place during the designated times.
But it does not say what he is to do. on those days. We have struck out rule 4 which saye what he is to do.


Hugh Guthrie: During tho6e five days he hears applications to make changes.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Where is there anything of that?


Hugh Guthrie: I thought it was in rule 3.
Mr. MACKENZIE. KING: It is not. It comes in rule 4, which we struck out. I think perhaps it was intended to strike out the latter half of rule 4 giving him the power to erase names; but not the first part, the power to add names.


Hugh Guthrie: I think I see now where I have made the mistake. The registrar makes his list and signs it on the fifteenth day before polling and no later than nomination day he delivers a copy of that list to the candidate. Then for five days thereafter he sits at this place which he designates to hear complaints. That would bring it to the tenth day before polling, and during

that time, "iif any registrar at any time after posting up any voters' lists, and not later than the tenth day"-that is, after he has set five days before the polling day -"is fully satisfied from representations made to him by any credible person that the name of any person who is qualified as an elector to vote at the election then expending within the palling division for which the registrar has been appointed has been omitted from the voters' list, he shall add such name to the copy of the list in his possession, below his signature and attest by his initials such addition." In like manner, if he is satisfied that the name has been improperly put on by himself, he may remove it. I think it was properly drawn in the first place. I misapprehended the objection of my hon. friend, and 'I think he misapprehended the rule, although I took it for granted he was right. Then the next rule, of course, provides that the registrar, having revised and corrected the copy, shall transmit it to the candidates and the returning officer, and so on to the Chieif Returning Officer. I will have to move the reconsideration of rule 4, as I misapprehended the objection of my hon. friend.


Georges Henri Boivin: As the schedule has not been adopted no motion is required for its reconsideration.


Hugh Guthrie: It will have to stand,
because it is on that that a rural registrar is entitled to correct any error he has made in the list. Rule 4 will have to stand as drafted.


John Howard Sinclair: I presume my hon. friend dose not mean to give the registrar power, without notice to any one, to strike names off and put them on?


Hugh Guthrie: That is his power in the first instance. He makes the list, he posts it up, and he sits for five days and determines any complaints he hears. In the first instance he only puts on such names as he thinks proper. That is the power of a registrar-or enumerator, if you see fit to call him so.
Mr. BELAiNID: Is that in the rural division?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes.


Mr.   RELAND@: I think in this case a Sunday should intervene between the date of the posting and the final draft, because in country towns most of the people in my province come in on Sunday. Would it be

possible to make it so? Otherwise the five days will elapse and most of the people concerned being a long distance from the town proper, will not know whether they are on the list or not.


Hugh Guthrie: I would like to oblige my hon. friend, but I do not see how we could permit these acts to be done on a Sunday. In my part df the country Sunday is a dies non.


Henri Sévérin Béland: It is with us too.


Hugh Guthrie: I doubt if the Act would be valid on the Lord's day for that reason.


Henri Sévérin Béland: The hon. minister sees
the point? It is not for the purpose of correcting anything on Sunday, but only for the purpose of giving the people an opportunity to find out whether their names are on the list.


Georges Henri Boivin: Will the hon. minister tell me in what form Rule 4 is to be?


Hugh Guthrie: I would like it to stand in the form in which it is printed. I agreed that it be struck out, but I misapprehended the whole scope of the rule.


Georges Henri Boivin: Do the changes first
made in Rule 5 hold good, or shall the rule remain as it was before Rule 4 was struck out?


Hugh Guthrie: The only provision in
regard to the posting of the lists is that two copies shall be posted up in two of the most public and conspicuous places within such polling subdivision. "He shall on the day fixed for the nomination of candidates deliver or send by registered mail to each of the candidates a copy of such lists." They have to be posted up on the fifteenth day before polling. Then the registrar has to sit for five days.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Is it going to be posted in every polling subdivision?


Hugh Guthrie: Two copies in every
polling subdivision.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Then it is not so badly
required that Sunday intervene.


John Howard Sinclair: My objection is to the striking off of names without notice to the voters. The right to vote should not be taken away from a man without notice. Under this section, if it is restored in its present shape, the registrar can strike off the list any man's name without giving him notice. That should not be allowed.


Hugh Guthrie: No, not under the general power given to the registrar. He is the judge. But if he does wrong the voter has his own remedy: he can go and vote. That is tlie point.


John Howard Sinclair: That is a very poor remedy.


Hugh Guthrie: That is the object of
Clause 63-to prevent wrongdoing.


John Howard Sinclair: The
meaning of this section seems to me to be that if any busybody conies to the registrar to get a man's name off the list he requires to give no notice, no proof, no affidavit, and the registrar has power to strike the name off and deprive the man of his VO lG .


Hugh Guthrie: My hon. friend surely realizes that he cannot deprive the man of his vote. The man can vote there, in spite of the most corrupt, iniquitous officer that ever was appointed. I think that his rights are absolutely safeguarded.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: That is, by reason of section 63?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Suppose, for the sake of argument, that one man was to strike twenty men off the list under rule 4. Surely the minister recognizes that if these names were struck off in such a wholesale manner it would take so long to swear the voters under section 63 on election day that most of them would be left out. My hon. friend shakes his head, but it is a fact that you will strike cases of that kind. Why should there not be a provision in rule 4 that any . man appearing before the registrar with the desire of having some one's name struck off the list shall give evidence with regard thereto under oath or in the form of some declaration which will make him liable? Under the provision as it stands I could go to the registrar and say: John Smith is not entitled to vote, and in support of that statement I could give the most trivial reason; the registrar thereupon has it absolutely, in his power to strike that name off the list. If that happened to forty men in a subdivision, the poll would be absolutely blocked. Such things have occurred and will occur again if this clause stands in its present form. It ought 'to be provided here -that such a statement or declaration shall be submitted in support of the representations made that shall make the one who submits them liable to a charge for perjury if it is found that his represen-248
tations are untrue. It is a shameful thing to give him the right to walk up and say: John Smith is not entitled to vote; I say so. Surely that is not right.
. Sir SAM HUGHES: Is the registrar obliged to strike the man's name off when some one comes up and makes such representations?


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: He may if he feels so inclined. The power is vested in him to strike names off or to leave them on as he sees fit, on the most trivial evidence imaginable.


Hugh Guthrie: My hon. friend is assuming that the official in question is corrupt. If so, we have given him power not to put the name on in the first place. The argument is that if forty or fifty names were left off, on election day there would not be time to swear them on. It has never worked out that way. Wherever this rule has been tried it has worked with so much satisfaction to both parties that they are both in favour of it. It has been tried out in Saskatchewan and Alberta; there has been no hitch whatever. Some hon. gentlemen opposite, both in the House as well as out of it, have expressed themselves in favour of the principle; they do not even want an extra witness to vouch for the man. But somehow or other when we come down to this part of the country we find the idea prevailing that everybody who has anything to do with an election is going to be corrupt. Now, we appoint a man and we give him power to enumerate, to make that list. To prevent him from doing wrong we give anybody the right to come and vote on election day who takes an oath. Surely that is safeguarding him. I cannot do any better.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend knows, because he alluded to it to-day, that there are in every community a number of people who are averse to taking an oath. A great many sects do not care to take an-oath; a number of women who will be voting for the first time may be sensitive about taking an oath. It is quite possible under this section for any of these enumerators to strike off the list all those who are known to be unwilling to take oaths, and they would all be disfranchised on election day. That is the effect of it; I am sure that the section as it stands will disfranchise thousands of electors.


Hugh Guthrie: I will not assume for a moment that we are going to have faulty or corrupt registrars. I assume that we are



going to have in these positions responsible and honest men, and that these names are going to be on the lists. Even if we do fail in securing the name in every instance, we have applied the safety valve which enables the bona fide voter whose name has been left off to vote.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The minister must realize that we are absolutely right in assuming that every one of these officials is going to be a partisan. That is one of the features of the machinery.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think that that is a fair assumption at all.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: We have suggested that there be an appeal to some recognized branch of the judiciary so as to gelt away from this partisan aspect of it, but the minister has ruled out every suggestion respecting any kind of revision by a court of revision, leaving the placing of names on lists and the striking off of names in the hands of his own appointees. That is just about as arbitrary as it is possible to make a Franchise Act. But when the power extends to giving an individual the right to strike off Ithe list the names of people who may be unwilling to swear-to deprive them of their vote unless they will take the oath-well, it really savours of an endeavour to disfranchise thousands of men and women.


Hugh Guthrie: No, it does not savour of an endeavour to do anything of the kind. I am willing to meet my hon. friend in any reasonable way, but I do not think that he is quite adhering Ito the arrangement we made in respect to that amendment. I understood that this section was Ito go through if I agreed to the amendment.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Not at all; not the whole section. My words will appear on Hansard.


Hugh Guthrie: I had a conversation
with my hon. friend; he made one exception only. I am willing to meet him even yet, but I do not wanlt to be driven to every possibility and to have the insinuation put up to me that everybody who is going to be appointed is going to be Ithere as a partisan and for corrupt purposes. I am satisfied that it is not going to be so. I am satisfied that in every instance proper persons will be appointed and that the law will be well administered. We are adopting the principle in Ithis Bill that in rural divisions the enumerators shall prepare the lists and that

they shall hear the appeals, and to prevent their doing wrong if they are evil-disposed we provide that notwithstanding their decision a man shall have a right to vote. Now, I do not want to change this. The section has been drawn with the greatest care. I do not know where it will land us if we do change it. I certainly was under the impression this evening when we melt that if I agreed to the amendment the clause would be agreed to.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I could not
speak for other hon. members, but in regard to one particular point I raised I was ready to meet my hon. friend as suggested; I made no agreement respecting the clause as a whole, and would not have thought of doing so. I made it perfectly plain, my remarks as they appear on Hansard will, I am sure, bear me out. When the Government proposes Ito give to partisan enumerators the right to make lists of their own liking something should be done to provide that bona fide voters shall be protected in the matter of having their names remain on the list or of being placed on the list if their names are not there.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Mr. Chairman, may I
suggest that rule 4 read as follows:
If any registrar, at any time after posting up any voters' list, and not later than the tenth day before the polling day, is fully satisfied from representations made to him by any credible person under oath that the name of any person who is qualified as an elector to vote at the election...
And so on.


Hugh Guthrie: I agree to that. Put
in Ithe words "under oath" after the words credible person" on line 4.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Is it not necessary, then, Ito frame an oath to be added to the list of forms?


Hugh Guthrie: "If in like manner"
means if under oath.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am referring to the oath itself.


Hugh Guthrie: There we are; I do nolt know where we are going to land. It has to be sworn to, but I do not know what oath you can frame to cover the evidence.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There is no
occasion for my hon. friend getting impatient in Ithis matter. We are framing a law for the protection of the electorate, and the matter of my hon. friend's inconvenience for a moment or two is not one of any concern Unless the minister can have

patience w-ith the committee, the committee will take its own course with him. I would ask the minister if he would interpret to the committee what he means when he says this officer is to administer an oath. What oath is to be administtered ?


Hugh Guthrie: I do not know. I accepted- the amendment of my hon. friend (Mr. Pardee) that the wordls "under oath" -should be added-. I suppose it means that the man shall state such facts as he knows and swear to them. I cannot provide an oath for each individual because I do not know what the circumstances would be. I think the term "under oath" i-s pretty broad and would cover everything. I would say that any intelligent officer would certainly [DOT] say: "Will you swear to -that story you tell me?" That would be sworn testimony and, being under o-ath, it would meet the -requirements of the Act. As I understand the matter, this is to avoid offhand -statements.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I do not know whether the -minister -sees my point or not. What I am anxious to have him do is to give us -some assurance as to the form of oath it will be necessary to have in this c-a-se.


Hugh Guthrie: I cannot suggest any other oath than "You swear that the evidence you -shall give shall be the truth, the whole truth -and nothing but the truth".
M-r. MACKENZIE KING: That is all I am asking the minister, that he give an interpretation -to the words "under o-ath".


Hugh Guthrie: That would be my interpretation.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is sufficient.
-Amendment agreed to.
M-r. SINCLAIR (Guysborough):	Should
not -some notice be given to the man whose name i-s asked to be struck off the list? This looks to me as if the thing were onesided. When you give a registrar power, on the oath, that is really not an oath, of some person who says: I think II p.m. So-and-So should be struck off -the list, to strike that name off, the man whose name is to be struck off ha-s no notice; the thing i-s done behind his back,, and when he -come-s to vote, he finds that his name is not in the list.


Hugh Guthrie: 
Jean-Joseph Denis: 
Hugh Guthrie: I prefer the form in the way my hon. f-riend (Mr. Pardee) put it. I think we all understand

 wh-at is meant by viva voce evidence under oath.
Rule (4), as amended, agreed to.
Rule (5), as amended, agreed to.
Rule (6), agreed to.
Schedule B to section 32 agreed to on division.


Hugh Guthrie: With the unanimous consent of the committee, I move that we do -now reconsider clause 33 which has been previously adopted.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. GU  THRIE@: I move to amend c-lau-se 33 by substituting for the words "twelve months" on the first line of page 24 of the Bill -the words "two years". We have changed the provision in clause 32 making lists available for two years.
Amendment -agreed to.
Section 33 as amended, agreed to.
On section 2, paragraph (k)-list of voters :


Hugh Guthrie: This paragraph was
allowed to -stand. I move that it be passed.
Paragraph (k) agreed to, and section 2 agreed to.


Hugh Guthrie: With the unanimous consent of the committee, I move to amend clause 49 by inserting the words "and padlocks" after the word "boxes" in the fortieth line on page 34 of the Bill.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to, and section 49, as amended, agreed to.
Hugh Guthrie: If my record is correct, that leaves clauses 19 and 76 still to be dealt with, clause 19 being the one under which the Chief Electoral Officer is appointed, and clause 76 being the one under which the fees of election officers are regulated. As regards both of these, I shall have to give the usual notice, and the matter will have to come before the committee. I do not know that I can proceed any further to-night, and therefore, I move that the committe rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Will the minister
withdraw his motion for a moment? I wish to call attention to the schedule on page 113. which was dealt with this afternoon.


Georges Henri Boivin: Does the minister
withdraw his motion that the committee rise?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes.
Motion withdrawn.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Some time ago I called attention to that part of schedule on page 113 which has reference to Nova Scotia. I understand that quite a number of names of advance polls were added this afternoon. I -suggested to the minister some time ago that f saw no reason why the name o' my town should be included in the schedule, because I do not know any one who wants to have the town of North Sydney named as an advance poll. On page 113 I see you have Bridgewater, Halifax, Kentville, Oxford, Parrsboro, North Sydney, Stewart, and other places. I really do not know where Stewart is, but I certainly do not think that North Sydney should be included in the list.


Hugh Guthrie: We added to the list
to-day, Dartmouth, Glace Bay, Sydney Mines, Stellarton, Amherst, Windsor and Annapolis Royal. The list as printed in the Bill was supplied by members of the Railroad Brotherhood. They added the names of Dartmouth, Glace Bay, Sydney Mines and Stellarton, and it was moved in the House this afternoon that Amherst, Windsor and Annapolis Royal should also be added. I may point out to my hon. friend, a fact that he probably knows, that if it should prove at the next election that at any of these advance polls fewer than fifty votes are polled those advance polls will be abolished. It is required that there shall be fifty votes.


Albert James Smith Copp: If fifty votes are not polled at an advance poll that place will cease to be an advance poll?


Hugh Guthrie: ' If there are not fifty votes at such a poll at the next election it will be blotted out as an advance poll.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: These polls are established largely for the convenience of railway men, but although our town is on the main line, so far as I know we have no railway people living there. For that reason I see no use for an advance poll in that town. Most of the railway men live in Sydney. The train passes through our town, as it does through any other town along the line, and there may be one or two persons I know nothing about, but I am not aware of any railway people living in North Sydney.


Hugh Guthrie: There are just three
classes for whom advance polls are provided. Previously we provided for sailors, commercial men railway men, "or other persons", but we amended the section today by striking out those last words, so that the section is now 'limited in its application to sailors, commercial men and railway men. As I have said, if at the next, election there are fewer than fifty votes polled at an advance poll that poll w'ill be removed. I fancy that some of them will not contain fifty votes.


Mr. DUFF:: Supposing forty-five votes
are polled at an advance poll?


Hugh Guthrie: Well, the Chief Electoral Officer will remove that place from his list of advance polls. The Act- says that if fewer than fifty votes are polled at the next election it shall be removed.


William Duff: But the forty-five votes will count? '


Hugh Guthrie: They would count in
the next election, of course.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Is it the intention of the Government to proceed with the Naturalization Bill, of Which they have given notice, before we go on further with the Franchise Bill?


Hugh Guthrie: If the Naturalization
Bill carries we shall require to amend section 29 of the Franchise Bill. We shall proceed with the Naturalization Bill.
Progress reported.


THE NATURALIZATION ACT, 1914, AMENDMENT.
[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. C. J. Doherty (Minister of Justice) Bill No. 184 to revive and

amend the Naturalisation Act, 1914, was read the second time and the House went into committee thereon, Mr. Boivin in the Chair. -
On section 1-Naturalization Act, 1914, revived and declared to have been in force since date of its sanction:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: The Minister of Justice gave quite a lengthy explanation of this legislation when it was introduced. If my rt. hon. friend would draw attention to any significant points now it might be unnecessary for him to repeat that ex-planat-ion.


Mr. DOHERTY:: On re-examination of
the Act of 1919 we found thatT there were twu omissions of clauses that ought to have been inserted and that there was a clause inserted which - was not consistent with the legislation that had been agreed upon. That being so, it seemed to be advantageous that we should repeal the Act of last year, replace the Act of 1914, and start over from there. There is in that course the additional advantage that the two Acts of 1914-that is, our Act, which by the way was the first, and the British Act, of 191-4-continue to be concurrent legislation. In the British system they have retained their Act of 1914 and amended it, and it seemed desirable, so far as we are concerned, that we should maintain in force our Act of 1914 and proceed by amending it. We shall then always have clearly in the amending sections of this Bill, and any amendments made in the future, clauses relating to legislation concurrent with that of the Mother Country and the other dominions. We have deemed it desirable to revive the Act of 1914, making any amendments now necessary apply directly to it instead of retaining the Act of 1919, which itself would require amendment.	.
On section 2-revocation of certificate of naturalization:


Charles Joseph Doherty: The insertion of subsection (b) represents the substantial difference between the clause as we are now enacting it and as it was enacted last year. It was omitted last year. I have been unable to ascertain whether it was a mere oversight or whether there was any special reason for it. It ought to have been inserted. It was in the British Act of 1918 and it Was amongst those clauses which formed the subject of previous consultation with the Dominions and -which had been assented to. It is therefore one that we
ought to have in order to maintain uniformity in the legislation.


William Daum Euler: Has the person whom it is proposed to denaturalize the right to demand an examination or investigationS-


Charles Joseph Doherty: It imposes an obligation on the Secretary of State to give him notice wherever revocation of his certificate is asked for upon any of the grounds set forth in paragraphs (a), (c), or (e) of subsection 2. That is where he:
(a) Has, during any war in which His Majesty is engaged unlawfully traded or communicated with the enemy;
(c) was not of good character at the date of the grant of the certificate;
(c) remains, according to the law of a state at war with His Majesty, a subject of that state.
In all these cases the Secretary of State is required to give him notice. In the other cases the Secretary of State may, if he deems proper, hold an inquiry before making his report to the Governor in 'Council. In that respect this is entirely the provision as it was passed last year the only difference being the inclusion of subsection (b).


William Daum Euler: Is there any good reason
why the first part of section 7 as it is proposed here should not be included in the provisions which have just been quoted by the minister, under which the Secretary of State shall give a person the privilege of an investigation or examination? For example:
7. (1) Where the Governor in Council, upon the report of the Secretary of State of Canada, is satisfied that a certificate of naturalization granted by the Secretary of State of Canada under this Act or granted under any Naturalization Act heretofore in force in Canada has been obtained by false representation or fraud, or by concealment of material circumstances, or that the person to whom the certificate was granted has shown himself by act or speech to be disaffected or disloyal to His Majesty, the Governor in Council shall by order revoke the certificate.
That will cover all the cases in which a person is not entitled to investigation. Why should he not be?


Charles Joseph Doherty: time save to supply toe omissions and to strike out a clause which I wall point out later on. The reason of inserting these omissions ie that they did form part of the amendments to toe Act of 1914 which bad been toe subject of previous consultation before they were enacted by toe British Parliament and which are necessary if our Part ITwo of toe Act of 1914 is to toe kept similar to the British Part Two of the legislation of 1914. In other words if both our legislations are to be kept uniform it is necessary in view of the previous consultation. I say "if tooth our legislations are to toe kept uniform," because I do not wiant to create any impression that this system is carried out toy toe British Parliament enacting whatever it likes and then our being Compelled to adopt the same thing. It is a matter of our proceeding by consent and concurrently. It places the British Parliament land ourselves, in dealing rodth this kind of legislation, in this position, that we have, to conform to those things which have been previously discussed before either of us legislate.


William Daum Euler: Is this one of them?


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Why should one be ex parte and the other ntot?


Charles Joseph Doherty: When the question was proposed we were consulted, but it is to be pointed out that we did not raise the question then-. It is also to she pointed out, as regards toe dliause which the hon. gentleman refers to, that the cause of revocation existed under toe Act of 1914, as respects both our legislation and the British legislation; and it had never been considered necessary to provide tor this special inquiry. The provision for the special inquiry was made when the new cases of revocation were introduced toy the legislation Iwhich the British Parti aonenit enacted in 1918, after toe consultation to which I have referred. If it now appears to this Parliament that provision ought to toe made for inquiry in all the oases of course it is quite possible for us to have a further consultation and make that provision, after we have arranged the matter with toe Government on the other side. It is an incident of endeavouring to carry on concurrent legislation that each of toe Parliaments has to deal with toe matters which have formed the subject of previous consultation.
If hon. members will Tead the British debates on the British Bill of 1918 they will see how careful that Parliament was, and how careful the minister directing the Bill was, to keep it always before that Partia- / ment that even though suggestions that
[Mr. Doherty.l
were imade that might toe desirable, action on them (must be deferred to laffard the opportunity for consultation. Now we are in precisely toe same position.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Does not the Act give the Governor in Council power to act in the matter? Why should one application be ex-parte and the other not? Why should not the man be heard as the Governor in Council and the Secretary of State have the right to determine?


Charles Joseph Doherty: As I have pointed out it might be very much better that he should


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Then, why not?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have tried to point this out:	If we exercised our separate and
distinct judgment, if the Parliament on the other side exercised its absolute independent judgment about this matter that we are trying to carry on by concurrent legislation, it may be that in this particular provision we would not destroy the necessary uniformity, but we will run the risk of it, and it is the part of prudence if we are going to keep our legislation concurrent that we should, in the modifications that we make, act after previous consultation with those who are exjpected to pass concurrent legislation with us. This whole system, I have no doubt, is susceptible of improvement, and I think it will call for improvement after proper opportunity for consultation upon the case. But I would ask hon. gentlemen to realize what we are doing now. We are only trying to put the legislation which Parliament passed last year-and Parliament last year was satisfied with this provision-we are only trying to bring it into proper form so that there may be no difficulty about the concurrence of our legislation with the British legislation. We are not proposing to take up the whole system for the purpose of improving it. The only object of going over these old sections at all is to put them in better form, and to bring out clearly the fact that our legislation is concurrent. I may say that if the British Government had not made these amendments at all we were all satisfied, ever since 1914, to go on with that particular first clause to which the hon. gentleman refers, without any provision for inquiry at all.


Mr. JACOBS:: I only came in _while the right hon. gentleman was speaking, therefore I am not fully conversant with the section that is now being discussed. I should like to ascertain from the minister if the British

Government has concurred in the change which is now proposed by this legislation.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes, the British Government have most fully concurred. As I explained when introducing the Bill, it was found, on a more careful examination of the British legislation, that the draughtsman of the legislation of last year had misapprehended the effect of the provision in that legislation and had mistakenly concluded from it that the particular clause and some other clauses, were essential to be inserted in our Bill; whereas the true interpretation of the British legislation, would not justify that conclusion, and we in our view that that is so resulting from a closer examination of the legislation,-were confirmed by (despatches from the British Government in which they pointed out the misunderstanding that took place last year as to the necessity of inserting, just as it was, the clause that gave rise to the discussions that we had, and which gave rise to a further examination of the British legislation with the result of the submission of this Bill. There is perfect concurrence on that subject.


Samuel William Jacobs: Without wishing to pry
into any confidential communications between this Government and the British Government, may I ask, were not other representations made with regard to certain further improvements which might have been made in the Act we passed last year?	j


Charles Joseph Doherty: On the part of the British Government?


Samuel William Jacobs: Yes, on the part of the British Government.


Charles Joseph Doherty: No, we have had no representations from the British Government looking to the improvement of the Act we passed last year.


Samuel William Jacobs: Did this Government
suggest any improvements?


Charles Joseph Doherty: We could not very well suggest improvements to an Act which they had already adopted. What we are endeavouring to do now is to bring existing legislation into uniformity. In the course of the discussion of the Act in 1918 the Government did make promises that at the expected conference they would make further suggestions, and I may say that it is fully to be expected that we will have some suggestions to offer looking to future modifications; but for the present the purpose
of thi's Bill is simply to get our legislation into actual conformity.
Mr. MA'CKIE (Edmonton): The last portion of section 7 reads, "has shown himself by act or speech to be disaffected or disloyal." Are the words "disaffected" and "disloyal" used as synonyms? If not, then what act or speech would be calculated to be a loss of affection for this country?


Charles Joseph Doherty: On different occasions
the courts have been called upon to interpret that word, but I am not in a position this evening to define just exactly what would constitute "disaffection." As I have already said several times, we are not now making substantially new legislation, we are dealing with the form of existing legislation. That clause, even without the passing of this Bill, would already be the law of this country, and therefore I did not come prepared to go into a discussion of what is already the law. But speaking in a general way there is perhaps not a very easy line of demarcation between what constitutes disaffection and what constitutes disloyalty. I think that while not being absolutely synonymous the two words are so closely related that any one might be excused if he mistook one for the other.


Mr. MACKIE (Edmonton):: Has the
British Parliament the same power as is now given to the Governor in Council under this Bill?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Certainly, they have the same power.


Mr. PARENT:: The only fault with this law is that it gives too much power to the Secretary of State. It is true that the form of the section would leave any person under the impression that the Governor in Council will act in a matter of this kind. But I must take it for granted that the minute the Secretary of State makes a recommendation' or report the Governor in Council will act upon it, and that therefore it may be assumed that all those powers are given to the Secretary of State himself. And we go further than that. Under section 3 we find these words:
The Secretary of State of Canada may, if he thinks fit, before making a report under this section, refer the case for such inquiry.
In other words, it is left entirely in the hands of the Secrtatry of State to decide whether or not a man should be denaturalized. The proceedings are ex parte, for nowhere in the law is the man who is going to be denaturalized given a chance to present his case against denaturalization. In

I
my opinion it gives too much power to the Secretary of State and is wrong in principle.


Charles Joseph Doherty: In the years to come the hon. gentleman may have an opportunity of testing by experience that when a power is conferred upon the Governor in Council to do .something upon the report of a minister, it does not by any means follow that the Governor in Council will act upon every such report. I may confide to the hon. member that I have been through the experience myself of making reports that were not adopted by the Governor in Council.


Georges Parent: No doubt that was in
bigger cases. But in these denaturalization causes the report of the Secretary of State will go as a matter of course.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I may point out to the hon. gentleman as indicative of our expressed intention upon that subject that the corresponding section of the British Act gives power absolutely to the Secretary of State without the intervention of His Majesty in council at all. But, inasmuch as we have the liberty to designate what authority within this country shall exercise different powers, Parliament wisely decided that this power should be vested in the Governor in Council, not in any one minister and it is the Governor in Council that requires to be satisfied. In three out of five cases of revocation it is the	duty of	the	Secretary
of State to give notice to the party concerned so that he may have an inquiry. lit will always be in the power of the Governor in 'Council, if it is of opinion that enquiry is necessary and the Secretary of State has reported without inquiry, to refer the report back' until inquiry is made, so that the parties concerned will have the full protection of the Governor in Council.
iMr. EULER: I understood the minister to say that the reason he could not place in the same category as the the others this particular clause whereby the person whose certificate is to be cancelled has the right to a hearing before a judge, was that it would destroy uniformtiy so far as the British Act is concerned. I understand the minister to state now that the British Act is not the same as ours with respect to these clauses which give to the people the right under certain circumstances to be tried before a judge. I would suggest under the circumstances that we might also place this clause in the category of the others. I 
think the principle would be absolutely right.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The hon. gentleman
misunderstood me. I said in regard to what authority exercises the powers of granting certificates or of revoking them, we might have designated the Governor in Council or the Secretary of State. There is no need for uniformity in that regard; and if we thought it desirable I am not prepared to say that we could not provide for inquiry in all these cases. But even though it be our opinion that it would be better to do that-in other words, that the British Parliament did not go far enough-I called the attention of the House" to the undesirability of our proceeding by making differences unless they are really of major importance and cannot possibly wait for consultation. But if we get away from dealing only with matters concerning which there has been consultation, sooner or later one of the Parliaments concerned will find itself perhaps unconsciously outside of the uniformity. As I say, the British Parliament was scrupulously careful not to enact anything that would be necessary to the general Imperial naturalization without previous consultation with the Dominions. I think that -we owe them the courtesy of following that example, even though w^e may adhere, perhaps, a trifle more than is absolutely necessary to uniformity in our provisions. I would not like by this Bill, which was introduced largely for the purpose of clearing away a misunderstanding, to start out to make a general improvement of existing law. I do think that there is room for improvement; if I continue to have any responsibility in connection with the matter, there are suggestions which it seems to me might very properly be made. As I have said, the minister charged with the Bill of 1918 when it went through the Imperial House observed, with regard to different suggestions that came from members there,' that he thought- they would form a proper subject of consultation in the future.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: If subsection (b) on page 2 is an old section I have nothing to say about it, but if it is new I think it is rather severe. It mentions a term of penal servitude; that might be a month in jail or it might he a fortnight, I suppose.


Charles Joseph Doherty: As I understand it, penal servitude in this country requires to be a sentence of two years in the penitentiary.
I do not know just exactly what the period is in England. As to this being a new

clause, it was omitted from our Act of 1919 but it was in the British Act of 1918 and was included in those amendments which the Imperial authorities submitted to the governments of the Dominions before they introduced the Bill. It is, therefore, one of the clauses which, if our legislation is to carry out the results of previous consultation, ought to be included in the Act. That does not mean that a man's certificate must be revoked in such case. Hon. members will notice the concluding clause of these enumerations;
And that (in any case) the continuance of the certificate is not conducive to the public good.
So that if the Governor in Council had no reason to consider that the maintenance of the certificate would be not conducive to the public good, the Governor in Council would be at perfect liberty not to revoke the certificate.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 4-application to court.
Herbert John Mackie: What authorities are contemplated by the words:
And in the Northwest. Territories to such authorities or persons as the Governor in Council may prescribe.


Charles Joseph Doherty: As the hon. gentleman knows, the Northwest Territories are now very considerably reduced, and they have not any organized system of Government.


Herbert John Mackie: Would the power be vested in a commissioner, or would the Government appoint any particular tribunal to deal with this matter?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think, in all probability, the power would be vested in a commissioner. I think this form is adopted leaving liberty to the Governor in Council in view of possible developments of the territories. To-day our choice would be exceedingly limited, but as time goes on, we may have opportunity for a wider scope.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 5-issue of certificate of naturalization :
William Daum Euler: In the riding which I represent there were in 1918 some 90 or 93 men who made application and passed a judge, and their applications came to the Secretary of State but they have never been acted upon. Will it be necessary for these men to go through the whole procedure again and have their names posted up for
three months, or will their applications be accepted without any further formalities'?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Before answering that
question absolutely, I should like to see how far the proceedings had gone.


William Daum Euler: I think it was done under an Order in Council1.


Charles Joseph Doherty: This is not a matter
to be dealt with in my own department, so perhaps I should not undertake to speak for the minister who has the decision of the question and who would be mv hon. colleague the Secretary of State (Mr. Sifton). But my impression of the matter wmuld be that if all those formalities had been complied with and application was pending before the Secretary of State, calling only for action by him, his action would be impeded since ' last year by the enactment of the. section which dealt with the ten-year period, and which we are about to deal with in this Bill. If that obstacle be removed in the particular cases referred to by the legislation we are now dealing with, while, I say,
I cannot undertake offhand this evening to bind the minister concerned, it would seem to me that he would be entitled to go on and act upon the evidence already before him without requiring it to be made all over again.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 6-section 26 of the Act of 1914 repealed:
Frederick Forsyth Pardee: What is section 26?


Charles Joseph Doherty: That is a section which last year disappeared from Ithe Act of 1914 by the legislation of 1919. It was a section in the third part of the Act of 1914 dealing with our own procedure and in no way connected with that portion which requires to be uniform. In the original Act there was a provision that commis-12 m. sioners might be appointed for purpose of taking oaths under thalt Act. Under section 24, which is reintroduced from the Act of 1919, the applicant is authorized to take the oath before any person duly authorized to administer judicial oaths by the laws of the province in which the applicant resides. That being so, the necessity for appointing commissioners especially to take oaths under this Act disappeared, and I think both the minister immediately concerned with the Bill of last year, and Parl'iament, thought it undesirable to have special commissioners

under this Act, and I must say I concur in this view. This is just to leave oaths under this Adt to be administered by officers who administer oaths generally.
On section 7-certificates granted to enemy subjects since 4th August, 1914:


Charles Joseph Doherty: The change is the addition of paragraph (d).


William Daum Euler: Subclause (2) establishes
whalt might be termed the ten-year probationary period for those of former alien enemy origin. While it permits naturalization of those who have previously lived in Canada for ten years, it does not make provision for those who may attain the full Iten-year residence in Canada after 1909. As this law stands now, the effect of it would be that any person of former alien enemy nationality who was resident in Canada on July 7, 1909, could now be naturalized, but a man who came to Canada in the fall of 1909, or in 1910, 1911, 1912, 1913, could nolt obtain naturalization until 1929. That is, he would have to go through a probation of from sixteen to twenty years. Such persons must wait until July 7, 1929, before they can be naturalized. lit would be fair to insert a provision that just so soon as a man of that kind has lived here for the full period of ten years, he should become eligible for naturalization. For instance, if he came Ito Canada in 1912, he should be eligible for naturalization in 1922. There should be even another provision made for exceptional cases, such provision, for example, as we find in the United States. If a man has not been there ten years the President has reserved Ito him the absolute right to grant him a certificate if his loyalty and general fitness are proved. Take for example the case of a man who came from the United States to Canada, having been away from Germany- and I know of an instance of this kind-for a good many years. He lived in the United States and took out his first papers, but he never completed his naturalization in the United States. He came to Canada, has not been here quite ten years and will not be eligible for naturalization.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Wlas he naturalized in the United States?


William Daum Euler: He had taken out his first papers only.


Charles Joseph Doherty: In answer to my hon. friend I may say that this particular subsection was taken practically verbatim out of an address of his own,-


William Daum Euler: I was going to mention that,


Charles Joseph Doherty: -in which he set forth what he at that time thought would be a proper measure. But, quite apart from that, I appeal to the hon. gentleman whether it is not a reasonable requirement on our part, in extending this exceptional opportunity, that the parties to. whom it is to be extended should have lived some period in this country before the war, and should during that period and during the war have had an opportunity of giving proof Of that loyalty, and so forth, which is required. I think the committee Will be unanimous on this point, that the provision that suspends for a time the naturalization of people who have just come into this country since the war is a proper precaution under the circumstances. Without any feeling of vindictiveness whatever, we must realize, I think, that this is only a necessary and proper precaution to 'take. After all, if we analysed our feelings towards those who were our enemies, and proceeded, in a not unfair process of reasoning, on the assumption that our enemies, being human like ourselves, might very probably entertain towards us the same kind of feelings that we have in respect of them, we would come to the conclusion that it was only fair to say to those coming after the war: "You should wait your ten years until we have had ample opportunity off judging of your conduct in the future." We are extending the benefit of citizenship to a certain class of people for whom exemption from the provisions of the law, as applicable to those who are coming in, is granted; and I do not think it is unfair to say that we should extend this benefit only to those whom we have had for ten years under our eye before the termination of the war. I do; not think that on reflection the hon. gentleman, whose zeal on behalf of those whom he represents I admire, will see that we have gone as far as we ought fairly to be asked to go, and that while cases of this class of people must appeal to every one's sympathy, we are after all acting as generously as we could be asked to act, by making this present provision. At all events, we are meeting the cases of all the people on whose behalf, up to this evening, I have heard any special appeal made.


William Daum Euler: The minister states that this clause was drafted practically according to an amendment I offered last year. That is true, and it was simply by an over-

sight on my (part that I did not make provision in my amendment last year-which did not carry after all-for those people of whom I am speaking. I am not accustomed to drafting laws, land (perhaps I might be excused in view of the fact that last year the statement was made that the British Act did not allow this clause to be accepted, whereas iwe find that the Acting Solicitor General (Mr. Guthrie), the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Rowell) and even the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) were all wrong in their reading of that Act. I will point out that in the case of the people whose naturalization we have been discussing there is a double safeguard. After ail, they must run the gauntlet of an examination before the judge, and the application must pass the Secretary of State. So that if either of these two men had the slightest suspicion as to the loyalty or fitness of any man making an application he would simply turn him down, and there could be no possible danger. This fact will remain, that the man iwho came in prior to July 7, 1909, can obtain naturalization, but the man who came in August, 1909, has to wait until 1929, twenty years. That does not seem to be altogether fair.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Perhaps, as time goes on, iwe may have opportunity for giving further consideration to that suggestion. As to the contrast the hon. gentleman makes, the case of the man who has to iwait twenty years looks harsh only 'because of the consideration that we have extended to those who had been here the ten years required. It is rather discouraging to find that when you extend a consideration it is immediately used as an .argument to show what an awful hardship some one, whom your considration does not reach, is suffering. We have to draw the line somewhere if this clause is to. be enacted at all, and .wherever rwe draw that line it will maJce a difference of ten years between the man. on one side and the man on the other side of it. I think that, for the time being iat all events, the present amendment which iwe are making meets amply all the cases that have been pleaded to us. We haive met them absolutely, 'and we have reserved .merely this one precaution, that we should require ten years in the country after the war, or a corresponding ten years before the termination of the war. It might not have been unreasonable, and it would have balanced it, if we had said ten yeais before the beginning of the war. But rwe have counted the war years in the ten, so that we have left ourselves with a
very narrow maTgin after all. I think that on reflection my hon. friend will see, notwithstanding his highly creditable zeal for those whom he represents, that under conditions 'as they are .the provision we have made goes as far as we would .be justified in going. Now, the hon. gentleman seemed to think that an observation I made involved .something that might call for excuse on his part. I did not mean to make any criticism of him in (that regard, nor do I think 'there was occasion for excuse. I merely desired to point out that cases that appealed to the hon. gentleman in the first instance have been fully met, and I think we might he given a little time to think over whether we ought to entertain the further 'appeal -that is made this evening to extend this consideration.


Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: Will paragraph
(b) subsection 2 of section 7 apply to a citizen of Alsace-Lorraine whose sympathy was with France and opposed to the enemy Government hut who was a subject of Germany?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I fancy that Alsace-Lorraine was the typical case that was in mind. During the war, once any French authority was prepared to vouch for the feelings of a citizen of Alsace-Lorraine, we never treated him as an alien enemy. It would apply to any person in that position.


William Henry White: I would like to call the attention of the minister to the position of one particular class of people as it is affedted by this Act. There is a very large class of settlers in Western Canada who came in 1909 and 1910, and took up land with the full understanding that they could become citizens and receive their naturalization papers and patents after the expiration of a certain time. I think there has been some provision made to allow them to secure Ithe patents to their land. I think the Minister of the Interior (Mr" Meighen) said last year that was the intention of the Government. But still it appears very unfair to them to deny them the rights of .citizenship under the circumstances. Although they have to pay municipal taxes, no matter how progressive many of them are in the settlement no one is allowed to become a councillor or a school trustee if he is not a citizen. These people are at a great disadvantage through no fault of their own.


Mr. ROWELL:: Of what nationality are they?
.3922


William Henry White: Any description of enemy; it might be Austrian, or any of the nationalities precluded for the coming citizen by this Act.


Newton Wesley Rowell: If they were Poles, or if they came from Czecho-Slovalria they would come in under this subsection.


William Henry White: I quite appreciate that, but still there remain a lot of people who came in believing that they were coming in under certain conditions which have not been recognized. The Act does not relieve them, I know some people who are very progressive but who have only been in the country for eight or nine years They have been prosperous and have greatly assisted in the development and the production of the country. Still they are put in a class by themselves. The President of the Privy Council told us the other night how the Mounted Police were used to travel amongst this very class of people and try to discover any cases of the use of seditious Language or any disloyal act but in none of the districts of East Edmonton or Victoria were they able to get a conviction. That is certainly a certificate that these people in the last ten years behaved loyally and well. These people cannot hold any public office, and at the .same time they are useful, progressive citizens and no fault has been found with them.


Herbert John Mackie: My hon.
friend is probably mistaken as to one feature of this case. The people he refers to are probably the ones who come from Galicia. They were under Austria at one time. Western Galicia is now classed as Polish territory, and all who came from that portion of Galicia under Polish dominion are able to get their naturalization papers without further difficulty. The only question that remains is as to those who came from Eastern Galicia and they are counted as alien enemies as they came from German Galicia. My hon. friend is mistaken as to the other class because they are capable of being naturalized as friends.


Richard Smeaton White: Where there
have been new territories created I have no doubt these people will be relieved, but it does not relieve their neighbours who may be just as good citizens.


Herbert John Mackie: Then if
Eastern Galicia does not belong to Ausltria it will be a question of the League of Nations to determine where Eastern Galicia shall

go. Eastern Galicia does not belong to Austria to-day but for the present those coming from Eastern Galicia are not being given their naturalization papers. All those who come from Western Galicia can be naturalized.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
On the motion of Right Hon . Mr. Doherty, the House adjourned at 12.25 a.m. Tuesday.
Tuesday, June 22, 1920.